STRENGTH PROPERTIES AND SULPHATE

RESISTANCE OF SELF-COMPACTING
CONCRETE INCORPORATING
SILICA FUME AND
METAKOLIN

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of degree
of
Master of Civil Engineering
(Structures)

Submitted by ANHAD

SINGH GILL Registration

No. 801022004

Under the guidance of

Dr. R. SIDDIQUE
Senior Professor
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
THAPAR UNIVERSITY PATIALA-147004
2012
i
ii
 ABSTRACT

A self-compacting concrete (SCC) is the one that can be placed in the form and can go through
obstructions by its own weight and without the need of vibration. Since its first development in
Japan in 1988, SCC has gained wider acceptance in Japan, Europe and USA due to its inherent
distinct advantages. The major advantage of this method is that SCC technology offers the
opportunity to minimize or eliminate concrete placement problems in difficult conditions. And it
avoids having to repeat the same kind of quality control test on concrete, which consumes both
time and labour. Construction and placing becomes faster & easier. It eliminates the need for
vibration & reducing the noise pollution. SCC provides better quality especially in the members
having reinforcement congestion or decreasing the permeability and improving durability of
concrete.

The primary aim of this study is to investigate the strength properties (compressive strength and
splitting tensile strength) and sulphate resistance of self compacting concrete made with Silica
fume and Metakolin. For this purpose cement is replaced by weight in three different proportions
of 5%, 10% and 15% by Silica fume and Metakolin respectively. Specimens are tested for
compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and sulphate resistance. Testing is done at age of
7, 28 and 56 days.

Self compacting concrete made in this work by incorporating Silica fume and Metakolin passes
all plasctic stage tests of SCC. Furthermore hardened stage tests (compressive strength and
splitting tensile strength) results were also positive. There was increase of 18 38% compressive
strength with incorporation of Silca fume and 15 45% increase with incorporation of
metakolin. Also there was increase in sulphate resistance of SCC when cement is replaced by
Silica fume and metakolin .

iii
 LIST OF
FIGURES
Sr. Description Page
No. Basic principles for production of SCC No.
1.1
2.1 U-type test apparatus 125
2.2 Slump flow test 13
2.3 Schematic of L-box 14
2.4 L- Box 15
2.5 V- Funnel 16
2.6 Slump Flow/J-Ring combination test 17
3.1 Slump-flow values incorporating different mineral admixtures 21
3.2 T50 time of SCC mixes incorporating different mineral admixtures 22
3.3 L-box ratio of SCC mixtures incorporating different mineral admixtures 22
3.4 Compressive strength of SCC mixes at various ages with fly ash 32
3.5 Graphic presentation of compressive strength test results 33
3.6 Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes incorporating fly ash 37
3.7 Splitting tensile strength of RA-SCC in Series I, II, and III at 28 days 38
3.8 Tensile strength of SCC incorporating recycle aggregates 39
3.9 Specimens in 10% magnesium sulphate solution after 400 days 42
exposure
3.10 Specimens in 10% sodium sulphate solution after 400 days exposure 42
Compressive strength loss of SCC mixtures subjected to sulphate attack in
3.11 44
10% magnesium sulphate solution
Compressive strength loss of SCC mixtures subjected to sulphate attack in
3.12 44
10% sodium sulphate solution
3.13 Compressive strength of cubes (Quary Dust) in water 45
3.14 Compressive strength of cubes (Quary Dust) in sodium sulphate solution 46
3.15 Compressive strength of cubes (Limestone Powder) in water 46
Compressive Strength of cubes (Limestone Powder) sodium sulphate
3.16 47
solution
4.1 Silica Fume mixed with cement 53
4.3 Magnasium Sulphate 54
4.4 L box 56
4.5 V- Funnel equipment 58
4.6 Slump flow test equipment 59
4.7 U box 61

iv
Sr. Description Page No.
No. Slump Flow Test 66
5.1
5.2 V- Funnel Test 66
5.3 Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume 67
5.4 Compressive Strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume 69
5.5 Compressive strength test in progress 69
5.6 Splitting tensile strength of Silica Fume Concrete 71
5.7 Splitting tensile strength test 72
5.8 Cube specimen placed in 5% MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial 73
Compressive strength of silica fume concrete after immersion in 5%
5.9 73
MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial curing)
Percentage loss of compressive strength after 28 days immersion in
5.10 75
MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial curing)
5.11 Compressive strength of metakolin concrete 78
5.12 Percentage increase in Compressive strength 79
5.13 Splitting tensile strength results of metakolin concrete 79
Compressive strength of metakolin concrete after immersion in 5%
5.14 81
MgSo solution (After 28 days initial curing)
4
Percentage loss of compressive strength after 28 days immersion in
5.15 83
MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial curing)

v
 LIST OF
Sr. Description TABLES Page
No. Physical Properties of Silica Fume No.
1.1
1.2 Chemical composition of Silica Fume 99

1.3 Chemical and physical properties of metakolin 10

2.1 Test methods to evaluate the workability properties of SCC 11
2.2 Acceptance criteria for Self-compacting Concrete 18
3.1 Fresh properties of RA-SCC mixtures in Series I, II and III 20
3.2 Fresh properties of SCC mix incorporating fly ash 24
3.3 Test results obtained by measurement of fresh concrete 25
3.4 Fresh properties of SCC 26
3.5 Fresh properties of SCC incorporating quarry and limestone 27
3.6 powder
Compressive strength of SCC mixtures 29
3.7 Compressive strength of RA-SCC mixtures in Series I, II and 30
3.8 III
Compressive strength of SCC mixes incorporating fly ash 32
3.9 Compressive strength results 34
3.10 Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes 36
3.11 Tensile strength of SCC 40
4.1 Composition of Portland cement 49
4.2 Physical Properties of Cement 50
4.3 Compressive strength of cement 50
4.4 Physical Properties of fine aggregates 51
4.5 Sieve analysis of fine aggregate 51
4.6 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (10 mm) 52
4.7 Sieve Analysis of Coarse Aggregates (10mm) 52
4.8 Mix proportions 55
5.1 Fresh Concrete Properties incorporating Silica fume 65
5.2 Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume 68
5.3 Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume 71
5.4 Compressive strength of SCC mixes after immersion in MgSo4 solution 74
5.5 Fresh Concrete Properties incorporating Metakolin 76
5.6 Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Metakolin 77
5.7 Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes with Metakolin 80
5.8 Compressive strength of SCC mixes after immersion in MgSo4 solution 82

vi
i
 CONTENT
S
CHAPTER DESCRIPTION PAGE
NO.
CERTIFICATE i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT iii
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF TABLES vi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 General 1
1.2 History Behind Development of Self-Compacting Concrete 2
1.3 Motive for Development of Self-Compacting Concrete 3

1.4 More about self compacting concrete 4

1.5 World-wide Current Situation of Self-Compacting Concrete 5
1.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of SCC 6
1.7 Need for this reasearch 7
1.8 Mineral Admixtures 8
1.8.1 Silica fume 8
1.8.2 Metakolin 9
CHAPTER 2 TESTS AND PROPERTIES 11
2.1 Properties 11
2.2 Test 11
CHAPTER 3 LITERATIRE REVIEW 19
3.1 Fresh Concrete Properties 19
3.2 Hardened Concrete Properties 28
3.2.1 Compressive Strength 28
3.2.2 Tensile Strength 36
3.3 Durability Properties 40
3.3.1 Sulphate Resistance 40
CHAPRET 4 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAME 49
4.1 Material Used 49
4.1.1 Cement 49

vii
i
4.1.2 Fine Aggregates 50

ix
 4.1.3 Coarse Aggregates 51
4.1.4 Water 52
4.1.5 Silica Fume 52
CHAPTER DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
4.1.6 Metakolin 53
4.1.7 Admixture 54
4.1.8 Magnasium Sulphate 54
4.2 Casting 54
4.3 Mix Design 55
4.4 Tests Conducted 56
4.4.1. Fresh Concrete Tests 56
4.4.1.1. L- Box Test Method 56
4.4.1.2 V Funnel Test 57
4.4.1.3 Slump Flow Test 59
4.4.1.4. U Box Test 60
4.4.2. Hardend Concrete Tests 62
4.4.2.1 Compressive Strength Test 62
4.4.2.2 Splitting Tensile Strength Test 62
4.4.2.3. Sulphate Resistance Test 63
CHAPTER 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 64
5.1 Silica Fume 64
5.1.1 Fresh Concrete Properties 65
5.1.2 Compressive Strength Test 67
5.1.3 Splitting Tensile Strength Test 70
5.1.4 Resistance to sulphate attack of concrete 72
5.2 Metakolin 75
5.2.1 Fresh Concrete Properties 75
5.2.2 Compressive Strength Test 76
5.2.3 Tensile Strength Test 79
5.2.4 Resistance to sulphate attack of concrete 80

REFERENCES 85

i
x
 1. Introduction
1.1 General

Page | Cement-based materials are the most abundant of all man-made materials and are
1 among the most important construction materials, and it is most likely that they will continue to
have the same importance in the future. However, these construction and engineering materials
must meet new and higher demands. When facing issues of productivity, economy, quality and
environment, they have to compete with other construction materials such as plastic, steel and
wood. One direction in this evolution is towards self-compacting concrete (SCC), a modified
product that, without additional compaction energy, flows and consolidates under the influence
of its own weight.

Self compacting concrete is a concrete which compacts itself, there is no further compaction
required for self compacting concrete. Development of self-compacting concrete (SCC) is a
desirable achievement in the construction industry in order to overcome problems associated
with cast-in-place concrete. Self compacting concrete is not affected by the skills of workers, the
shape and amount of reinforcing bars or the arrangement of a structure and, due to its high-
fluidity and resistance to segregation it can be pumped longer distances (Bartos, 2000).

The concept of self-compacting concrete was proposed in 1986 by professor Hajime Okamura
(1997), but the prototype was first developed in 1988 in Japan, by professor Ozawa (1989) at the
University of Tokyo. Self-compacting concrete was developed at that time to improve the
durability of concrete structures. Since then, various investigations have been carried out and
SCC has been used in practical structures in Japan, mainly by large construction companies.
Investigations for establishing a rational mix-design method and self-compactability testing
methods have been carried out from the viewpoint of making it a standard concrete. Self-
compacting concrete is cast so that no additional inner or outer vibration is necessary for the
compaction. It flows like honey and has a very smooth surface level after placing. With regard
to its composition, self-compacting concrete consists of the same components as conventionally
vibrated concrete, which are cement, aggregates, and water, with the addition of chemical and
mineral admixtures in different proportions.

Self compacting concrete has been described as the most revolutionary development in concrete
construction for several decades. Originally developed in Japan to offset a growing shortage of
skilled labour, it has proved to be beneficial from the following points,
1. Faster construction,
2. Improved durability,
3. Reduction in site manpower,
4. Better surface finish,

1
5. Easier placing,
6. Safer working environment.

Usually, the chemical admixtures used are high-range water reducers (super plasticizers).
Mineral admixtures are used as an extra fine material, besides cement, and in some cases, they
replace cement.

1.2 History Behind Development Of Self

Compacting Concrete

Making concrete structures without vibration, have been done in the past. For
examples, placement of concrete under water is done by the use of tremie without vibration.
Mass concrete, and shaft concrete can be successfully placed without vibration. But the above
examples of concrete are generally of lower strength and difficult to obtain consistent
quality. Modern application of self-compacting concrete (SCC) is focussed on high
performance, better and more reliable and uniform quality.Self-compacting concrete, in
principle, is not new. Early self-compacting concretes relied on very high
contents of cement paste and, once
superplasticizers became available, they were added in the concrete mixes. The mixes required
specialized and well-controlled placing methods in order to avoid segregation, and the high
contents of cement paste made them prone to shrinkage. The overall costs were very high and
applications remained very limited.

The introduction of modern self-leveling concrete or self-compacting concrete (SCC) is

associated with the drive towards better quality concrete pursued in Japan around 1983, where
the lack of uniform and complete compaction had been identified as the primary factor
responsible for poor performance of concrete structures (Dehn et al., 2000). Due to the fact that
there were no practical means by which full compaction of concrete on a site was ever to be fully
guaranteed, the focus therefore turned onto the elimination of the need to compact, by vibration
or any other means. This led to the development of the first practicable SCC by researchers
Okamura and Ozawa, around 1986, at the University of Tokyo and the large Japanese contractors
(e.g. Kajima Co., Maeda Co., Taisei Group Co., etc.) quickly took up the idea. The contractors
used their large in-house research and development facilities to develop their own SCC
technologies. Each company developed their own mix designs and trained their own staff to act
as technicians for testing on sites their SCC mixes. A very important aspect was that each of the
large contractors also developed their own testing devices and test methods (Bartos, 2000).

In the early 1990s there was only a limited public knowledge about SCC, mainly in the Japanese
language. The fundamental and practical know-how was kept secret by the large corporations to
maintain commercial advantage. The SCCs were used under trade names, such as the NVC
(Non-vibrated concrete) of Kajima Co., SQC (Super quality concrete) of Maeda Co. or the
Biocrete (Taisei Co.). Simultaneously with the Japanese developments in the SCC area, research
and development continued in mix-design and placing of underwater concrete where new
admixtures were producing SCC mixes with performance matching that of the Japanese SCC
concrete (e.g. University of Paisley / Scotland, University of Sherbrooke / Canada) (Ferraris,
1999).

1.3 Motive for Development of Self-

Compacting Concrete

Recognising the lack of uniformity and complete compaction of concrete by vibration,

researchers at the University of Tokyo, Japan, started in late 1980s to develop Self compacting
concrete. By the early 1990s, Japan has developed and used SCC that does not require vibration
to achieve full compaction. By the year 2000, the SCC has become popular in Japan for
prefabricated products and ready mixed concrete. The utilisation of self compacting concrete
started growing rapidly.

The other motive for development of self-compacting concrete was the social problem on
durability of concrete structures that arose around 1983 in Japan. Due to a gradual reduction in
the number of skilled workers in Japan's construction industry, a similar reduction in the quality
of construction work took place. As a result of this fact, one solution for the achievement of
durable concrete structures independent of the quality of construction work was the employment
of self-compacting concrete, which could be compacted into every corner of a formwork, purely
by means of its own weight. Studies to develop self-compacting concrete, including a
fundamental study on the workability of concrete, were carried out by researchers Ozawa and
Maekawa (Bartos, 2000) at the University of Tokyo.

During their studies, they found that the main cause of the poor durability performances of
Japanese concrete in structures was the inadequate consolidation of the concrete in the casting
operations. By developing concrete that self-consolidates, they eliminated the main cause for the
poor durability performance of the concrete. By 1988, the concept was developed and ready for
the first real-scale tests and at the same time the first prototype of self-compacting concrete was
completed using materials already on the market. The prototype performed satisfactorily with
regard to drying and hardening shrinkage, heat of hydration, denseness after hardening, and other
properties and was named High Performance Concrete.

At almost the same time, High Performance Concrete was defined as a concrete with high
durability due to low water-cement ratio by professor Aitcin (Ouchi et al., 1996). Since then, the
term high performance concrete has been used around the world to refer to high durability
concrete. Therefore, Okamura (1997) has changed the term for the proposed concrete to Self-
Compacting High Performance Concrete.
1.4 More about self compacting
concrete

Self compacting concrete can be described as a high performance material which flows under its
own weight without requiring vibrators to achieve consolidation by complete filling of
formworks even when access is hindered by narrow gaps between reinforcement bars (Zhu et al.,
2001). SCC can also be used in situations where it is difficult or impossible to use mechanical
compaction for fresh concrete, such as underwater concreting, cast in-situ pile foundations,
machine bases and columns or walls with congested reinforcement. The high flowability of SCC
makes it possible to fill the formwork without vibration (Khayat et al., 2004).

The method for achieving self-compactability involves not only high deformability of paste or
mortar, but also resistance to segregation between coarse aggregate and mortar when the
concrete flows through the confined zone of reinforcing bars (Okamura et al.,2003).
Homogeneity of SCC is its ability to remain unsegregated during transport and placing. High
flowability and high segregation resistance of SCC are obtained by:

1. A larger quantity of fine particles, i.e., a limited coarse aggregate content,

2. A low water/powder ratio, (powder is defined as cement plus the filler such as fly ash, silica
fume etc.),
3. The use of superplasticizer (Okamura et al., 2003).

Because of the addition of a high quantity of fine particles, the internal material structure of SCC
shows some resemblance with high performance concrete having self compactibility in fresh
stage, no initial defects in early stage and protection against external factors after hardening. Due
to the lower content of coarse aggregate, however, there is some concern that: (1) SCC may have
a lower modulus of elasticity, which may affect deformation characteristics of prestressed
concrete members and (2) creep and shrinkage will be higher, affecting prestress loss and long-
term deflection (Mata, 2004).

Self compacting concrete can be produced using standard cements and additives. It consists
mainly of cement, coarse and fine aggregates, and a filler, such as fly ash or Super-pozz, water,
super plasticizer and stabilizer. The composition of SCC is similar to that of normal concrete but
to attain self flow ability admixtures, such as fly ash, glass filler, limestone powder, silica fume,
Super-pozz, etc; with some superplasticizer is mixed.

Three basic characteristics that are required to obtain SCC are: high deformability, restrained
flowability and a high resistance to segregation (Khayat et al., 2004). High deformability is
related to the capacity of the concrete to deform and spread freely in order to fill all the space in
the formwork. It is usually a function of the form, size, and quantity of the aggregates, and the
friction between the solid particles, which can be reduced by adding a high range water-reducing
admixture (HRWR) to the mixture. Restrained flowability represents how easily the concrete can
flow around obstacles, such as reinforcement, and is related to the member geometry and the
shape of the formwork. Segregation is usually related to the cohesiveness of the fresh concrete,
which can be enhanced by adding a viscosity-modifying admixture (VMA) along with a HRWR,
by reducing the free-water content, by increasing the volume of paste, or by some combination
of these constituents.

To produce SCC, the major work involves designing an appropriate mix proportion and
evaluating the properties of the concrete thus obtained. In practice, SCC in its fresh state shows
high fluidity, self-compacting ability and segregation resistance, With these good properties, the
SCC produced can greatly improve the reliability and durability of the reinforced concrete
structures. In addition, SCC shows good performance in compression and can fulfill other
construction needs because its production has taken into consideration the requirements in the
structural design.

Fig. 1.1: Basic principles for the production of SCC (Dehn et al.,
2000).

.
1.5 World-wide Current Situation of Self-
Compacting Concrete
Self-compacting concrete has already been used in several countries. In Japan, major
construction projects included the use of SCC in the late 90s. Today, in Japan, efforts are being
made to free SCC of the special concrete label and integrate it into day-to-day concrete
industry production (Okamura, 1997). Currently, the percentage of self-compacting concrete in
annual product of ready-mixed concrete (RMC), as well as precast concrete (PC), in Japan is
around 1.2% and 0.5% of concrete products.

In the United States, the precast industry is also leading SCC technology implementation through
the Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) which has done some research on the use of SCC
in precast/prestressed concretes starting with 1999 (Bartos, 2000). It is estimated that the daily
production of SCC in the precast/prestressed industry in the United States will be 8000 m3 in the
first quarter of 2003 (around 1% of the annual ready-mix concrete). Furthermore, several state
departments of transportation in the United States (23 according to a recent survey) (Bartos,
2000) are already involved in the study of SCC. With such a high level of interest from the
construction industry, as well as manufacturers of this new concrete, the use of SCC should grow
at a tremendous rate in the next few years in the United States. However, even if it is made from
the same constituents the industry has used for years, the whole process, from mix design to
placing practices, including quality control procedures, needs to be reviewed and adapted in
order for this new technology to be applied properly.

The introduction of the SCC in Europe is largely connected with the activities of the
international association RILEM, France, particularly of its Technical Committee TC145-WSM
on Workability of Fresh Special Concrete Mixes (Dhir et al., 1999). The TC145-WSM was
founded in 1992 and immediately attracted expert memberships from all over the world. The aim
was to look at the production stage of a number of special concretes and identify workability
parameters and other characteristics of the mixes in their fresh state that governed the reliable
and economical achievement of the special or high-performance parameters the concretes
offered. As the importance of the SCC became widely recognized, other European countries,
Germany, Sweden, UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Finland, etc., have decided to keep up
with the developments in this area. For example, in Sweden, the SCC market share was at five
percent in RMC and PC in 2002, and was expected to double in 2003. Housing and tunneling, as
well as bridge construction for the Swedish National Road Administration were the main areas of
use for SCC. In the Netherlands and Germany, the precast industry is mainly driving the
development of SCC, with an expected eight percent of market share in 2003 in Netherlands.

Today, self-compacting concrete is being studied worldwide, with papers presented at almost
every concrete-related conference, but until now - year 2003 - there is no universally adopted
standardized test method for evaluation of self-compactability of this concrete. Currently, the use
of self-compacting concrete is being rapidly adopted in many countries. The use of self-
compacting concrete should overcome concrete placement problems associated with the concrete
construction industry. However, there still is a need for conducting more research and
development work for the measurement and standardization of the methods for the evaluation of
the self-compacting characteristics of SCC.

1.6 Advantages And

Disadvantages Of SCC
It can also be regarded as "the most revolutionary development in concrete construction for
several decades". Originally developed to offset a growing shortage of skilled labor, it is now
taken up with enthusiasm across European countries for both site and precast concrete work. It
has proved beneficial economically because of a number of factors as noted below (Krieg, 2003
and ENFARC, 2002):

i. Faster construction,
ii. Reduction in site manpower,
iii. Easier placing,
iv. Uniform and complete consolidation,
v. Better surface finishes,
vi. Improved durability,
vii. Increased bond strength,
viii. Greater freedom in design,
ix. Reduced noise levels, due to absence of vibration, and
x. Safe working environment.

Because compaction is eliminated, the internal segregation between solid particles and the
surrounding liquid is avoided which results in less porous transition zones between paste and
aggregate and a more even colour of the concrete . Improved strength, durability and finish of
SCC can therefore be anticipated

Very good finish effect can be achieved of a pure SCC cement placed in a steel mould, de-
moulded after 24h after casting. The surface is so smooth and dense that it can reflect light.

For much concrete construction, the structural performance is improved by increasing

reinforcement volumes, limiting cracking by using smaller bar diameters and using complex
formwork, all of which increase the difficulty of compaction (Okamura et al., 2003). Self
compacting concrete meets the above developments by making casting homogeneous concrete
in congested structures possible; it also improves efficiency and effectiveness on site by reducing
the construction time and labour cost.

SCC requires higher powder and admixture (particularly super plasticisers) contents than NVC
and so the material cost is higher (The Concrete Society and BRE, 2005). It was reported that in
most cases, the cost increase ranged from 20% to 60% compared to similar grade NVC (Nehdi et
al., 2004;). However, in very large structures, increased material cost by using SCC was out
weighed by savings in labour costs and construction time.

1.7 Need For This

Research
SCC has not gained much local acceptance though it has been promoted in the Middle East for
the last five years. Awareness of SCC has spread across the world, prompted by concerns with
poor consolidation and durability in case of conventionally vibrated Normal concrete. The
reluctance in utilizing the advantages of SCC is,
1. Lack of research or published data pertaining to locally produced SCC.
2. The potential problems for the production of SCC, if any, with local marginal aggregates and
the harsh environmental conditions prevailing in the region.
Therefore, there is a need to conduct studies on SCC.

1.8 Mineral
Admixtures

1.8.1 Silica
Fume

Silicon, ferrosilicon and other silicon alloys are produced by reducing quartz, with coal and iron
or other ores, at very high temperatures (2000C) in electric arc furnaces (St John,1998). Some
silicon gas or fume is produced in the process, which reaches the top of the furnace with other
combustion gases, where it becomes oxidized to silica in contact with the air and then condenses
as < 0.1 m to 1 m spherical particles of amorphous silica. This material is usually known as
silica fume. It is also referred to as micro silica or more properly, condensed silica fume. Silica
fume is an ultra fine powder, with individual particle sizes between 50 and 100 times finer than
cement, comprising solid spherical glassy particles of amorphous silica (85-96 percent SiO2).
2
Condensed silica fume has a surface area of about 20,000 m /kg and a relative density generally
in the range of 2.20 to 2.5 (Kosmatka et al., 2002).
The pozzolanic reactions take place when silica fume is added to the concrete mixture, and the
amorphous silica, which is the major component of the pozzolan, reacts with calcium hydroxide
formed from the hydration of the calcium silicates with the resulting product being a calcium
silicate hydrate (C-S-H) (Mindess et al., 2003). Usually, after micro-silica is being added to the
concrete mix, the matrix of micro silica concrete becomes very dense (St John, 1998). This
denseness effect has been attributed to the extreme fineness of micro silica. Silica fume is used in
amounts between 5% and 10% by mass of the total cementitious material, in applications where
high degree of impermeability and high compressive strength are needed in concrete. In some
situations, the water demand of concrete containing silica fume increases with increasing
amounts of silica fume, unless a water reducer or plasticizer is used. Some lean mixes may not
experience an increase in water demand when only a small amount (less than 5%) of silica fume
is present.
Micro-silica is also very effective in reducing both bleeding and segregation. It may contribute to
stickiness of a concrete mixture, adjustments, including the use of high-range water reducers,
may be required to maintain workability and permit proper compaction and finishing. The use of
silica fume generally aids the pump ability of concrete and is most effective in lean mixtures.
Because of its containing silica fume may exhibit an increase in plastic shrinkage cracking
concrete is protected against drying bleeding characteristics, concrete. The problem may be
avoided by ensuring that such, both during and after finishing. With proper proportioning and
material selection, silica fume can improve the durability of concrete, its resistance to sulphate
attack, and the early strength development (Ramachandran, 1984).
 Table 1.1 : Physical Properties of Silica Fume (khayat,and Aitcin,1987)
Colour Varies from white or pale-grey to a dark grey
It is generally equal to that amorphous silicon which is about 2.2.
Specific
depending upon its chemical composition the specific gravity of silica
Gravity
fume particle can be as high as 2.4-2.55
2
Specific About 20000 m /kg approximately 10 times more than Portland
Surface Area cement
Particle Size Mostly fine spheres with a mean diameter of .1 micron
Bulk Loose 3
230-300kg/m
Density

Table 1.2: Chemical composition of Silica Fume (khayat, and Aitcin, 1987)
Constituents Percent
SiO2 90-96

Al2O3 0.5-0.8

MgO 0.5-1.5

Fe2O3 0.2-0.8

CaO 0.1-0.5

Na2O 0.2-0.7

K2O 0.4-1.0

C 0.5-1.4

S 0.1-0.4

1.8.2
Metakolin

Metakaolin is an artificial pozzolana produced by burning selected kaolinite clay within a

specific temperature range (between 650 and 800 _C). When heated to 700900 _C, kaolin
becomes calcined, losing up to 14% hydroxyl water and changing into MK (Caldarone et al.,
1994). Because the production of MK can be closely controlled, a higher degree of purity and
pozzolanic reactivity can be obtained with proper quality control (Kostuch et al., 1993). MK is
basically made up of silica and alumina in an amorphous state, that react with calcium hydroxide
(CH) produced by Portland cement hydration to form calcium hydrosilicate (CSH) and
calcium hydroaluminosilicate (essentially gehlenite C2ASH8). There is a consensus in the
literature that the pozzolanic reaction between MK and CH helps to refine the binder capillary
porosity, with the direct consequence of improving the mechanical characteristics mainly at
early ages, and durability e.g. resistance to sulfate attack ,chloride ingress and alkali silica
reaction. The permeability, scaling resistance, chemical resistance, and freezing and thawing
durability of the MK concrete mixture were similar or slightly better than those of the SF mixture
(Zongin et al. 1999). Improvement in other aspects of durability such as sulfate resistance, rapid
chloride ion permeability, and expansion due to alkali- silica reaction are also confirmed in MK
mixtures (with increased MK replacement levels of up to 25%) compared with control and SF
mixtures (khatib et al., 1998). The chemical and physical properties of metakolin are given
below in Table 1.3.

Table 1.3 : Chemical and physical properties of metakolin (Guneyisi et al., 2010)

Constituents Percent
CaO 0.78
SiO2 52.68
Al2O3 36.34
Fe2O3 2.14
MgO 0.16
SO3 -
K2O 0.62
Na2O 0.26
LOI 0.98
Specific Gravity 2.5
2
BET Fineness (m /kg) 12000
2. Tests And Properties
2.1 Properties

Fresh SCC must possess at required levels the following key properties:

Filling ability: This is the ability of the SCC to flow into all spaces within the formwork
under its own weight.

Passing ability: This is the ability of the SCC to flow through tight openings such as
spaces between steel reinforcing bars, under its own weight.

Resistance to segregation: The SCC must meet the required levels of properties A &
B whilst its composition remains uniform throughout the process of transport and placing.

2.2 Tests

Some of the important tests conducted on fresh SCC to evaluate its workability are summarized
under in a table and are briefly explained later.

Table 2.1 : Test methods to evaluate the workability properties of SCC

(EFNARC, 2002).

Test Methods
Property
Laboratory Field
(Mix Design) (Quality Control)
Filling Ability Slump Flow Test Slump Flow Test
T50cm Flow Test T50cm Flow Test
V-Funnel Test V-Funnel Test
Orimet Test Orimet Test

Passing Ability L- Box Test

U- Box Test J-Ring Test
Fill Box Test

Segregation Ressistance GTM Test GTM Test

V-Funnel At T5mins V-Funnel At T5mins
U-type test: Of the many testing methods used for evaluating self-compactability, the U-
type test (Fig. 2.1) proposed by the Taisei group is the most appropriate, due to the small
amount of concrete used, compared to others (Ferraris, 1999). This test is used to measure the
filling ability of SCC. The apparatus consists of a vessel that is divided by a middle
wall into two compartments. It provides a good direct assessment of passing ability.

For conducting the U-box test, one of the compartments of the apparatus is filled with the
concrete sample and filled concrete is left to stand for 1 minute. Then the sliding gate is lifted to
allow the concrete to flow out into the other compartment. After the concrete comes to rest, the
height of the concrete in the compartment that has been filled is measured in two places and the
mean height (H1) is calculated. Also the height in the other compartment (H2) is measured. The
filling height is then calculated as H1- H2. The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.
If the concrete flows as freely as water, at rest it will be horizontal, so H1- H2 = 0. Therefore, the
nearer this test value, i.e., the filling height', is zero, the better the flow and passing ability of
SCC (EFNARC, 2002).

Fig. 2.1 : U-type test (Ouchi et al., 2000)

Slump Flow test: The slump flow test is used to assess the horizontal free flow of SCC
in the absence of obstructions. The basic equipment used is the same as for the conventional
Slump test. The test method differs from the conventional one by the fact that the concrete
sample placed into the mold is not rodded and when the slump cone is removed the sample
collapses (Ferraris, 1999). The diameter of the spread of the sample is measured, i.e. a
horizontal distance is determined as opposed to the vertical distance in the conventional Slump
test. The Slump Flow
test can give an indication as to the consistency, filling ability and workability of SCC. The SCC
is assumed of having a good filling ability and consistency if the diameter of the spread reaches
values between 650mm to 800mm (EFNARC, 2002).

Fig. 2.2 : Slump flow test (Zhimin et al.,2008)

Orimet test: The test is based on the principle of an orifice rheometer applied to fresh
concrete (Bartos, 2000). The test involves recording of time that it takes for a concrete sample to
flow out from a vertical casting pipe through an interchangeable orifice attached at its lower
end. The shorter the Flow-Time, the higher is the filling ability of the fresh mix. The Orimet
test also shows potential as a means of assessment of resistance to segregation on a site.

L-Box test: This method uses a test apparatus comprising of a vertical section and a
horizontal trough into which the concrete is allowed to flow on the release of a trap door from
the vertical section passing through reinforcing bars placed at the intersection of the two
areas of the apparatus (Dietz et al., 2000). The time that it takes the concrete to flow a
distance of 200mm and 400mm into the horizontal section is measured, as is the height of the
concrete at both ends
of the apparatus (H1 & H2). The L-Box test can give an indication as to the filling ability and
passing ability.

Fig. 2.3 : Schematic of L-box (Grdic et al., 2010).

 Fig. 2.4 : L-box (Google Images for SCC)

Orimet/J-Ring combination test: This recently developed test involves the J-

Ring being placed centrally below the orifice of the Orimet apparatus, allowing the
discharged mix to fall into it and flow outwards (Bartos, 2000). The Orimet time is recorded
as in the conventional Orimet test, along with the diameter of the concrete spread and the
height of the concrete within the J-Ring. The more dynamic flow of concrete in this test
simulates better the behaviour of a SCC mix when placed in practice compared with the
Slump-Flow variation. The Orimet/J-Ring combination test will be used in the future as a
method of assessing filling ability, passing ability and resistance to segregation (Bartos, 2000).

V-funnel test: Viscosity of the self-compacting concrete is obtained by using a V-

funnel apparatus, which has certain dimensions (Fig. 2.5), in order for a given amount of
concrete to pass through an orifice (Dietz et al., 2000). The amount of concrete needed is 12
liters and the maximum aggregate diameter is 20 mm. The time for the amount of concrete to
flow through the orifice is being measured. If the concrete starts moving through the orifice,
it means that the stress is higher than the yield stress; therefore, this test measures a value
that is related to the viscosity. If the concrete does not move, it shows that the yield stress is
greater than the weight of the volume used.
 Fig 2.5 : V-funnel (Dietz et al., 2000)

GTM Segregation test: This is a very recent test measuring the separation of
aggregate in a sample after a period of time and wet sieving. The test has a potential for
detection of tendency to segregate (Dehn et al., 2000). It completes the tests (Slump-Flow, L-
Box, etc.) carried out to estimate the filling ability in free or shut-in environment (i.e. with
some "wall-effect") by specifying the segregation resistance. This test can be used in
laboratory when developing a concrete mix, as well as on site, when carrying out suitability
tests on the delivered concrete.

Slump Flow/J-Ring combination test: This test (Fig. 2.6) involves the slump
cone being placed inside a 300mm diameter steel ring attached to vertical reinforcing bars at
appropriate spacing (the J-Ring itself) (Kosmatka et al., 2002). The number of bars has to
be adjusted depending on the maximum size aggregate in the SCC mix. Like in the Slump
Flow test, the diameter of the spread and the T-50 time are recorded for the evaluation of SCC
viscosity. The Slump Flow/J-Ring combination test is an improvement upon the Slump Flow
test on its own as it aims to assess also the passing ability of the fresh mix. In this respect,
the SCC has to pass through the reinforcing bars without separation of paste and coarse
aggregate.
 Fig. 2.6 : Slump Flow/J-Ring combination test (Kosmatka et al., 2002)

In order to ensure that the SCC has not lost its uniformity during transport and placing due to its
highly flowable and self leveling nature, it is suggested that the in-situ tests, such as rebound
hammer, pull-out, etc. should be conducted. Non-variations in these near-surface properties may
be considered as an indication of no loss of uniformity (Zhu et al., 2001).

The size and quantity of coarse aggregates in a SCC mixture are directly related to the concrete
passing ability. The passing ability requirements depend on the formwork geometry and the
extent of congestion of the reinforcement. Risk of blockage is reduced by providing adequate
viscosity.

Adequate cohesiveness can be obtained by incorporating a viscosity-modifying admixture

(VMA) along with a high range water reducing admixture to control bleeding, segregation, and
surface settlement (Khayat et al., 1997).
Typical acceptance criteria for SCC with a maximum aggregate size of up to 20 mm are
presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 : Acceptance criteria for Self-compacting Concrete (EFNARC,

2002)

Method Unit Minimum Value Maximum Value

Slump flow mm 650 800

J Ring mm 0 10
V- Funnel sec 6 12
L-Box (H2/H1) 0,8 1,0
U- Box (H2-H1)mm 0 30
Orimet sec O 5
Fill Box % 90 100
 3. LITERATURE REVIEW

As already discussed self compacting concrete posses many advantages over the normal
concrete. Elimination of vibration for compacting concrete during placing through the use of
Self Compacting Concrete leads to substantial advantages related to better homogeneity,
enhancement of working environment and improvement in the productivity by increasing the
speed of construction . Understanding of this concrete flow property is of interest to many
researchers.

Self-compacting concrete extends the possibility of use of various mineral by-products in its
manufacturing and with the densification of the matrix, mechanical behavior, as measured by
compressive, tensile and shear strength, is increased. On the other hand, the use superplasticizers
or high range water reducers, improves the stiffening, unwanted air entrainment, and flowing
ability of the concrete. Practically, all types of structural constructions are possible with this
concrete.
In this section we will study of some of previous work done by researchers on some of key
properties of self compacting concrete.

3.1. Fresh Concrete

Properties

Kou And Poon (2009) studied fresh properties such as flowabilty, passing abilty,
segregation resistance of self compacting concrete using recycled fine and coarse aggregates.
They prepared three series of SCC mixtures with different fine recycled aggregate contents as
replacement of river sand and water-to-binder (W/B) ratios. The SCC mixtures were prepared
with 0, 25, 50, 75 and 100% fine recycled aggregates, the corresponding water-to-binder ratios
(W/B) were 0.53 and 0.44 for the SCC mixtures in Series I and II, respectively. In series III,
three different W/B ratios of 0.44, 0.40, and 0.35 were used. Ordinary Portland cement (with
a fineness of 3520
2 3
cm /g and density of 3150 kg/m respectively) and fly ash (FA) were used as the cementitious
3
materials in the SCC mixtures. Proportion of cement in all thre series is 340 kg/m . Two types of
fly ash was used, the first one was a fine fly ash (f-FA) (not used in series I) which complied
with BS 3892 with most of the particles passing through the 45 m sieve (Used proportion 70
3
kg/m ). The other one was the rejected fly ash (r-FA) with most of the particles >45 m (Used
3
proportion 200 kg/m ). The chemical admixtures used were a superplasticizer (Grace, ADVA-
109) and a viscosity agent (Grace, V -MAR 2) commercially available in Hong Kong. Slump
flow test, GTM screen stabity test and L-box tests were conducted and their result is given in
Table 3.1 below.
It is evident from Table 3.1 that the slump flow diameter increased with an increase in the fine
recycled aggregate content. This was attributed to the high water absorption capacity of the fine
recycled aggregates compared to river sand. From Table 3.1 it can be seen that the blocking ratio
varied from 0.85 to 0.93 for the RA-SCC mixtures in Series I. The blocking ratio was between
0.87 and 0.94 for the RA-SCC mixtures in Series II. Furthermore, the blocking ratio of the RA-
SCC mixtures in Series III was between 0.87 and 0.94 as the W/B ratio decreased from 0.44 to
0.35. The results indicated that the RA-SCC mixtures prepared in this study achieved adequate
passing ability and maintained sufficient resistance to segregation.

Table 3.1 : Fresh properties of RA-SCC mixtures in Series I, II and III (Kou
And Poon, 2009)

Mix Initial Slum Slump Segregati L box test Wet

code slum p loss on ratio density
p flow (%) (%) (Kg/m3)
flow (after
1h)
Diamete Diamete Ratio Time (s)
r r (%)
(mm) (mm) Series
Control 760 740 2.6 I8.9 0.85 36.3 2220
-
1
RF25 765 735 3.9 9.1 0.87 29.5 2210
RF50 775 730 5.8 9.5 0.90 20.5 2200
RF75 785 725 7.6 10.3 0.91 25.1 2170
RF100 795 715 10.1 11.1 0.93 23.8 2170
Series
Control 820 800 2.4 II10.3 0.87 23 2200
-
2
RF25 825 795 3.6 10.4 0.89 20.4 2160
RF50 835 785 6.0 10.6 0.91 20.7 2140
RF75 845 775 8.3 10.3 0.92 14.7 2120
RF100 860 770 10.4 9.9 0.94 13.4 2140
Series
RF100A 860 770 10.4 III9.9 0.94 13.4 2140
RF100B 810 750 7.4 10.8 0.94 27.0 2180
RF100C 795 735 7.5 10.2 0.87 18.7 2150

Uysal And Sumer (2011) conducted fresh properties tests such as slump flow, T50, and
L- box on self compacting concrete replacing portland cement with different mineral
admixtures. They prepared sixteen series of mix proportions, of which one is control, and fifteen
2
were prepared by replacing portland cement (specific surface area 399.6 m /kg) with fly ash
(FA)(15%, 25% and
3
35%) (proportion used is 83, 138, 193 kg/m respectively) granulated blast furnace
slag
 3
(GBFS)(20%, 40% and 60%) (110, 220, 330 kg/m respectively) limestone powder (LP)(10%,
3
20% and 30%) (55, 110 165 kg/m respectively), basalt powder (BP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55,
3 3
110, 165 kg/m respectively) and marble powder (MP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110, 165 kg/m
respectively). A natural river sand and crushed limestone with a maximum size of 16 mm was
3
used as fine and coarse aggregates respectively. The total powder content was fixed to 550 kg/m
and the waterpowder ratio (w/p) was selected as 0.33. Test results are depicted blow in Fig. 3.1,
3.2 and 3.3.

800

700

600

500
Slump Flow

400
(mm)

300

200

100

0
Control FA 15, 25, 35 GBFS 20,40,60 LP 10,20,30 BP 10,20,30MP
10,20,30

Fig. 3.1 : Slump-flow values (Uysal And

Sumer, 2011)

In terms of slump flow, all SCC mixtures exhibited satisfactory slump flows in the range of 690
750 mm, which is an indication of a good deformability. The slump flow time for the concrete to
reach diameter of 50 cm (T50) for all the mixtures was less than 5 s and all SCC mixtures
showed flow time values in the range of 25 s. Both the slump-flow values and the T50 times are
in good agreement to that of the values given by European guidelines for range of applications.

L-box test (time taken to reach 400 mm distance (T400), time taken to reach 800 mm distance
(T800) and the ratio of heights at the two edges of L-box) represents the filling and passing ability
of SCC. In L-box test blocking ratio (h2/h1) must be between 0.8 and 1.0. L-box tests are
depicted above in figure 11. All the mixtures of SCC have remained in target range which is as
per EFNARC standards.
 T5
0
6

4
(sec)

3
T50

T50
2

Fig. 3.2 : T50 time of SCC mixes .(Uysal And Sumer, 2011)

L- box
1.2

0.8
L- Box Ratio

0.6
(h2/h1)

L- box
0.4

0.2

Fig. 3.3 : L-box ratio of SCC mixtures. (Uysal And Sumer, 2011)

Xie et.al (2000) reported the optimum mix parameters of high strength self
compacting concrete with ultra pulverized fly ash. All the materials used in this research
were locally available. In this research cement was replaced by 30% of ultra pulverized fly
ash of total
cementitious material and sand was replaced by broken gravels. Super-plasticizer content is 1.0-
3
1.6 % of total cementitious material for water content of 175 l/m . When the super-plasticizer
content is higher than 1.9% compressive strength decreases because of bleeding. The results of
this research indicates that higher the sand ratio, better the workability of fresh SCC, and smaller
the compressive strength difference between SCC and normal concrete and the sand ratio cannot
be less than 40%.

Siddique (2010) performed the various tests and reported results of various fresh
properties of self compacting concrete. The various tests conducted were slump flow test
(slump flow diameter and T50cm), J-ring test (flow diameter and difference in concrete
height inside and outside J-ring (h2h1)), L-box test (time taken to reach 400 mm distance
T400mm, time taken to reach 600 mm distance T600mm, and time taken to reach 800 mm distance
T800mm, ratio of heights at the two edges of L-box (H2/H1), V-funnel test (time taken by
concrete to flow through V- funnel after 10 sec T10s, time taken by concrete to flow through
V-funnel after 5 min T5min), U- box test (difference in height of concrete in two
chambers (H2H1)) for various mix compositions of SCC incorporating fly ash. The mixes
3 3
were prepared with five percentages of class F fly ash (15%; 85 kg/m , 20%; 110 kg/m , 25%;
3 3
135 kg/m , 30%; 165 kg/m and 35%;
3
195 kg/m respectively). Proportions of cement are 465, 440, 415, 385 and 255
3
kg/m
respectively. A polycarboxylic ether based superplasticizer complying with ASTM C 494 type F,
with density approximately 1.10 and pH approximately 5.0 was used. The various test results
were given below in Table 3.2. A slump flow value ranging from 500 to 700 mm for a concrete
to be self-compacting was suggested. At slump flow >700 mm, the concrete might segregate, and
at <500 mm, the concrete might have insufficient flow to pass through highly congested
reinforcement. All the mixes in the present study conform to the above range since the slump
flow of SCC mixes is in the range of 600700 mm. The slump flow time for the concrete to
reach diameter of 500 mm for all the mixes were less than 4.5 s.

The J-ring diameter and difference in concrete height inside and outside J-ring were in the range
of 540625 mm and the difference in height was less than 40 mm. As per EFNARC , time
ranging from 6 to 12 s is considered adequate for a SCC. The V-funnel flow times were in the
range of 410 s. V-funnel flow time is the elapsed time in seconds between the opening of the
bottom outlet depending upon the time after which opened (T10s and T5min) and the time when
the light becomes visible from the bottom, when observed from the top. Test results of this
investigation indicated that all SCC mixes meet the requirements of allowable flow time.
Maximum size of coarse aggregate was kept as 16 mm in order to avoid blocking effect in the L-
box. The gap between rebar in L-box test was 35 mm. The L-box ratio H2/H1 for the mixes was
above 0.8 which is as per EFNARC standards. U-box difference in height of concrete in two
compartments was in the range of 540 mm.
 Table 3.2 : Fresh properties of SCC mix. (Siddique, 2010)

U-
Slump Flow j-Ring V-funnel L-Box
box

Mix
T5min (H1
h2 T400mm T600mm TL
Dia. T50cm Dia T10s (s) (H2/H1) H2)
h1
(mm) (s) (mm) (s) (s) (s) (s)
(mm) (mm)

SCC1 673.3 4.5 586.7 2.3 7.5 15.0 3.5 8.3 11.9 0.89 20

SCC2 690.0 3.0 580.0 6.7 4.5 5.1 1.4 2.4 3.5 0.95 10

SCC3 603.3 4.4 540.3 37.0 5.2 7.6 0.5 1.3 2.4 0.85 40

SCC4 673.3 3.0 626.7 3.0 6.1 9.5 1.2 2.2 4.0 0.95 5

SCC5 633.3 4.0 556.3 7.0 10.0 18.5 2.8 4.8 6.9 0.92 20

Grdic et al. (2010) conducted tests such as slump-flow test for flowability and viscosity,
L-box test for testing passing ability and sieve segregation test for testing the segregation
resistance of self compacting concrete using recycled aggregates in place of coarse
aggregates in various percentages (0% , 50% and 100%). For making of concrete mixture the
fractions of 0/4, 4/8 and
8/16 mm of the river aggregate were used, and the fractions 4/8 and 8/16 of recycled aggregate.
Test results are given below in Table 3.3. From table it can be seen that slump flow test the
distribution, in all three cases, amounted to 73 cm which ranks all the designed mixtures in the
SF2 class which is the most common class in civil engineering usage and practice. For SF2 class,
the T500 results should be in interval of 3.56.0 s. All the mixtures matched this requirement. No
segregation or water separation was observed. All the mixtures meet the criterion that the ration
of heights of concrete at the ends of L-box is no less then 0.8. The results demonstrate that all
mixtures were resistant to segregation.

Table 3.3 : Test results obtained by measurement of fresh concrete (Grdic et

al., 2010)

Type of Density Slump floe T500 (s) L-box test Sieve Wc (water
3
concrete (kg/m ) test (cm) segregation cement factor)
(%)
E 2391 73.5 5.60 0.94 11.7 0.41
P50 2366 73.5 5.40 0.95 9.31 0.43
P100 2355 72.5 6.00 0.98 5.2 0.45

Gesoglu et al. (2009) conducted various tests such as slump flow time, L-box height
ratio, and V-funnel flow time to study fresh properties of self compacting concrete. A total
of 22 concrete mixtures were designed having a constant water/binder ratio of 0.44 and a total
3
binder content of 450 kg/m . The control mixture included only a Portland cement (PC) as the
binder while the remaining mixtures incorporated binary, ternary, and quaternary cementitious
blends of
PC, fly ash (FA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (S), and silica fume (SF). { Meaning of
binary, ternary and quaternary is : binary (PC + FA. PC + S, PC + SF), ternary (PC + FA + S,
PC
+ FA + SF, and PC + S + SF) and quaternary (PC + FA + S + SF)}. The replacement levels for
both FA and S were 20%, 40% and 60% while those of SF were 5%, 10% and 15% by weight of
3
cement. Proprtion of cement used ranges from 180 to 450 kg/m for different
mixtures. Proportions of fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag and silica fume are in
range of 0
3 3 3
270 kg/m , 0 270 kg/m and 0 67.5 kg/m respectively. Result of tests are given below
in
Table 3.4.

All of the concrete mixtures were designed to give a slump flow diameter of 70 +- 3 cm which
was achieved by using superplasticizer at varying amounts. As seen in Table 3.4 that the slump
flow diameter of the concretes ranged from 67 to 73 cm conforming EFNARC
recommendations. Similarly, slump flow time was always lower than 5 s for all of the concretes
meeting the upper limit of EFNARC. The L-box test showed that apart from the control mixture,
the mixtures, each of which having binary blends of cementitious materials, and mixture
containing 45% FA and 15% SF did not satisfy the lowest H2/H1 ratio of 0.8 recommended by
EFNARC. As it is clearly observed in Table 3.4 that, however, all of the concretes made with
ternary and quaternary blends of supplementary cementitious materials had H2/H1 ratios of
0.820.93 meeting the EFNARC limitations. Therefore, the combined use of the mineral
admixtures in ternary and quaternary blends remarkably improved the filling and passing ability
of the SCCs. The time measured using the V-funnel was in the range of 3.2 17.4 s depending
mainly on the mineral admixture used. The lowest V-funnel flow time of 3.2 s was measured for
the control concrete while the mixture with 40% S had the highest flow time of 14 s.
Incorporating SF or S in binary system generally made the concretes more viscous. However,
using FA beyond 20% replacement level decreased the viscosity which in turn resulted in much
lower V-funnel flow time of the concretes. It was observed in Table 3.4 that all of the concretes
incorporating any of the ternary cementitious blends generally satisfied the EFNARC limitations
not only for the V-funnel flow time but also L-box height ratio and slump flow time.

Table 3.4 : Fresh properties of SCC (Gesoglu et al., 2009)

Mix Slump flow L-Box V-funnel flow time

(s)
T50 (s) D (cm) H2/H1
Control - PC 1.0 67.0 0.706 3.2
20FA 2.0 67.5 0.706 10.4
40FA 2.0 73.0 0.800 6.0
60FA 1.0 72.0 0.950 4.0
20S 3.0 67.0 0.704 10.0
40S 3.0 71.0 0.706 14.0
60S 3.0 70.5 0.732 12.0
5SF 5.0 67.0 0.732 10.0
10SF 4.0 68.0 0.824 10.0
15SF 4.0 69.5 0.918 10.0
15FA5SF 3.0 69.0 0.844 7.5
30FA10SF 2.0 69.5 0.892 6.0
45FA15SF 3.0 72.0 0.791 6.0
15S5SF 4.0 68.0 0.929 8.0
30S10SF 3.0 71.5 0.824 5.2
45S15SF 3.8 70.5 0.824 11.2
10FA10S 3.0 70.5 0.854 9.9
20FA20S 2.2 69.0 0.859 6.6
30FA30S 3.0 73.0 0.904 6.2
7.5FA7.5S5SF 3.4 67.5 0.871 6.0
15FA15S10SF 2.8 67.5 0.851 4.9
22.5FA22.5S15SF 2.8 70.0 0.869 4.2
Acceptance criteria of SCC suggested by ERNARC
Minimum 2.0 65.0 0.8 6.0
Maximum 5.0 80.0 1.0 12.0
Boukendakdji et al. (2011) studied the results of an experimental investigation
carried out to study the effect of granulated blast furnace slag and two types of
superplasticizers on the properties of self-compacting concrete (SCC). In control SCC, cement
was replaced with 10%,
15%, 20%, and 25% of blast furnace slag. Two types of superplasticizers: polycarboxylate based
superplasticizer and naphthalene sulphonate based superplasticizers were used. Tests were
conducted for slump flow, the modified slump test, V-Funnel, J-Ring, U-Box, and compressive
strength. The results showed that polycarboxylate based superplasticizer concrete mixes give
more workability and higher compressive strength, at all ages, than those with naphthalene
sulphonate based superplasticizer. Inclusion of blast furnace slag by substitution to cement was
found to be very beneficial to fresh self-compacting concrete. An improvement of
workability was observed up to 20% of slag content with an optimum content of 15%.
Workability retention of about 45 min with 15% and 20% of slag content was obtained using a
polycarboxylate based superplasticizer; compressive strength decreased with the increase in
slag content, as occurs for vibrated concrete, although at later ages the differences were small.

Kathirvel et al. (2010) studied fresh properties of SCC with partial replacement of
cement by
Quarry and limestone (dust) powder. They replaced Ordinary portland cement (53 Grade) 10%,
20% and 30% by limestone powder and quarry dust respectively. Limestone powder with
particle size less than 0.125 mm having a specific gravity of 2.53 was used. The specific gravity
3 3
of crusher dust is 2.30. Mix proportions of cement and filler is 214.24 kg/m and 200 kg/m
respectively. High performance concrete superplasticizer, Conplast SP430 was used to reduce
water cement ratio for a required workability. Results are given below in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5 : Fresh properties of SCC (Kathirvel et

al., 2010)

Mix ID Slump flow T50 cm Vfunnel V @ 5min L box U box

(mm) (sec) (sec) (sec) (H2/H1) (mm)
CS 741 1.08 6.82 2.5 0.986 08
1L 748 1.02 6.78 2.34 0.994 05
2L 716 1.24 7.10 2.66 0.917 12
3L 695 1.43 8.64 3.52 0.849 18
1Q 720 1.41 7.38 3.29 0.884 17
2Q 698 1.67 7.65 3.45 0.852 22.5
3Q 672 1.86 11.41 4.62 0.811 27

Workability test results were found out as significant as per the recommendations given
by EFNARC. While replacing cement by limestone powder by 10% the flow properties was high
when compared to control SCC and also the passing ability and filling ability also increased. For
20% and 30% it was within the permissible limit recommended by EFNARC. But it was slightly
decreased when compared to control SCC and 10% lime replacement. While replacing cement
by 10% quarry dust the flow properties was high when compared to control SCC. For 20 and
30% the flow properties decreased when compared to 10% quarry replacement but satisfies the
acceptable limits.

3.2 Hardened Concrete

Properties

3.2.1 Compressive
Strength

Uysal And Sumer (2011) studied compressive strength of self compacting concrete
replacing portland cement with different mineral admixtures . They prepared sixteen
series of mix proportions, of which one is control, and fifteen were prepared by replacing
2
portland cement (specific surface area 399.6 m /kg) with fly ash (FA)(15%, 25% and 35%)
(proportion used is
3
83, 138, 193 kg/m respectively) granulated blast furnace slag (GBFS)(20%, 40% and 60%)
3
(110, 220, 330 kg/m respectively) limestone powder (LP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110 165
3 3
kg/m respectively), basalt powder (BP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110, 165 kg/m respectively)
3
and marble powder (MP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110, 165 kg/m respectively). After the
3
preliminary investigations, the total powder content was fixed to 550 kg/m and the water
powder ratio (w/p) was selected as 0.33. A new generation polycarboxylate based
superplasticizer was employed. A natural river sand and crushed limestone with a maximum size
of 16 mm was used as fine and coarse aggregates, respectively. The specific gravity and water
absorption properties of river sand and crushed limestone are 2.59%, 1.44%, and 2.73%, 0.22%,
respectively.

It can be seen from Table 3.6, the compressive strength values are in the range of 64.8751.65
MPa at 7 days. At 28 days, GBFS20 specimen is the highest one (77.97 MPa) and LP30 is the
lowest one (60.21 MPa) respectively. At the early stage, pozzolanic reactions of FA and GBFS
were not sufficient to increase compressive strength. But at 28 days the slower pozzolanic
reactions played a part in the GBSF mixture and it has the highest compressive strength results.
In the case of FA and GBFS, filling of the voids between the larger cement particles, and
increasing production of secondary hydrates by pozzolanic reactions with the lime resulting from
the primary hydration enhances compressive strength.

Here the role of BP and LP are also better understood as it only acts like inert filler reducing the
compressive strength of the BP and LP series. But, at early ages, MP series have showed
significant performance. This is about the physical nature of better packing, by addition of MP
leads the compressive strength due to the better dispersion and the denser matrix of cement
grains. The addition of FA and GBFS to SCC mixtures had positively affected late age behaviour
at 90 and 400 days. The compressive strength values were in the range of 89.0872.42 MPa at 90
days and were in the range of 105.6978.38 MPa, respectively at 400 days.

Table 3.6 : Compressive strength of SCC mixtures (Uysal And

Sumer,2011)

Code 7 days 28 days 90 days 400 days

Control 64.9 75.9 85.0 100.5
FA15 62.0 74.2 87.0 102.0
FA25 61.4 73.4 86.3 105.7
FA35 55.1 67.5 79.4 92.2
GBFS20 62.3 77.9 87.9 101.8
GBFS40 63.4 74.8 89.1 96.8
GBFS60 58.1 71.6 80.7 85.5
LP10 60.4 69.3 80.2 86.0
LP20 57.4 65.2 74.2 78.6
LP30 54.8 60.2 67.2 72.4
BP10 62.9 72.1 83.3 89.5
BP20 59.7 65.9 77.3 81.9
BP30 51.7 62.2 72.4 78.4
MP10 63.9 76.3 86.3 97.6
MP20 64.0 77.5 82.2 96.8
MP30 59.4 70.8 80.6 93.4

Kou And Poon (2009) studied compressive strength of self compacting concrete
using recycled fine and coarse aggregates. They prepared three series of SCC mixtures with
different fine recycled aggregate contents and water-to-binder (W/B) ratios. Ordinary Portland
cement and fly ash (FA) were used as the cementitious materials in the SCC mixtures. Two
types of fly ash was used, the first one was a fine fly ash (f-FA) which complied with BS 3892
with most of the particles passing through the 45 m sieve. The other one was the rejected fly
ash (r-FA) with most of the particles >45 m.

In Series I, five SCC mixtures were prepared and a W/B ratio of 0.53 was used for all the
concrete mixtures. No f-FA was added. The fine recycled aggregates were used as 0, 25, 50, 75
and 100% by volume replacements of the river sand. In Series II, five SCC mixtures were
3
prepared with a W/B ratio of 0.44. 70 kg/m of f-FA was added to increase the cementitious
materials content. Similarly, the fine recycled aggregates were also used as 0, 25, 50, 75 and
100% by volume replacements of the fine natural aggregates. In Series III mixtures, 100% fine
recycled aggregates were used to replace river sand and three W/B ratios of 0.44, 0.40 and 0.35
were employed. In all the concrete mixtures, the cement and r-FA contents were kept constant at
3 3
levels of 340 kg/m and 200 kg/m respectively.
It is evident in Table 3.7 that at early ages (1, 4 and 7-day) compressive strength was slightly
decreased as the % replacement of sand by the fine recycled aggregates increased from 50 to
100%. At the late curing ages (28 and 90-day), the compressive strength of the RA-SCC
mixtures in Series I prepared with 75% and 100% fine recycled aggregates was approximately
10% lower than that of the control-1. The compressive strength of Series II SCC mixes was
higher than that of Series I SCC mixtures due to reduced W/B ratios. Table 3.7 indicates that the
compressive strengths of the RA-SCC mixtures were higher than that of the control-2. This may
be due to the presence of f-FA, and the pozzolanic reaction between Ca(OH)2 in the fine
recycled aggregate and the fly ash forming additional CSH and enhancing strength.
Compressive strength of Series III prepared by using 100% fine recycled aggregate as the fine
aggregate increases as the W/B ratio decreased at all the test ages.

Table 3.7 : Compressive strength of RA-SCC mixtures in Series I, II and III

(Kou And Poon
,
2009)

Mix code Recycled W/B Compressive strength (MPa)

agg. Fine
(%)
1-day 4-day 7-day 28 -day 90-day
Series I
Control - 0 0.53 10.3 26.8 32.9 44.3 56.5
1
RF20 25 0.53 11.2 29.0 34.0 44.5 54.7
RF50 50 0.53 8.8 25.3 31.1 43.4 55.7
RF75 75 0.53 9.4 26.0 29.7 41.3 50.8
RF100 100 0.53 9.8 23.6 29.2 38.7 50.1
Series II
Control - 0 0.44 11.1 30.3 36.8 53.7 78.9
2
RF25 25 0.44 13.8 38.3 43.9 64.3 82.6
RF50 50 0.44 17.5 38.4 42.1 62.3 81.4
RF75 75 0.44 13.8 32.3 40.9 56.3 75.3
RF100 100 0.44 15.1 29.2 38.3 53.2 71.7
Series III
RF100A 100 0.44 15.1 29.2 38.3 53.2 71.7
RF100B 100 0.40 15.6 33.1 44.0 59.1 77.0
RF100C 100 0.35 16.6 39.8 43.8 64.2 81.8

Nanthagopalan et al. (2011) : The main objective of there study is to explore the
possibility of using manufactured sand (Msand) in self compacting concrete. In recent
years, Msand produced by crushing rock deposits is being identified as a suitable alternative
source for river sand in concrete. In this process, an attempt was made to understand the
influence of paste
volume and w/p ratio (water to powder ratio) on the properties of self-compacting concrete
(SCC) using Msand. The powder and aggregate combinations were optimized by using the
particle packing approach, which involves the selection of combinations having maximum
packing density. The chemical admixtures (superplasticisers, viscosity modifying agent) were
optimised based on simple empirical tests. Fresh concrete tests such as slump flow, T 500 and J-
ring were performed on SCC; hardened concrete tests were limited to compressive strength.
From the results, it was observed that relatively higher paste volume is essential to achieve the
required flow for SCC using Msand, as compared to river sand. Low and medium strength (25
60 MPa) SCCs were achieved by using Msand based on the approach adopted in the study.
Results showed that it is possible to successfully utilize manufactured sand in producing SCC.

Khatib (2005) reported that in addition to the coarse recycled aggregates, fine
recycled aggregates (<5 mm) can also be used to replace natural fine aggregates in the
production of concrete. He reported that when natural fine aggregates in concrete were
replaced by 0%, 25%,
50%, 75% and 100% fine recycled aggregates and the free water/cement ratio was kept constant
for all the mixes, the 28-day strength of the concrete developed at a slower rate. Furthermore, the
concrete mixtures containing fine recycled aggregates had higher shrinkage than the natural
aggregates concrete.

Siddique (2010) reported compressive strength of self compacting concrete using class
3
F fly ash. Five concrete mixes were made, which had total powder content to 550 kg/m
3
(cement + fly ash). Proportions of cement are 465, 440, 415, 385 and 255 kg/m respectively.
3
Coarse aggregate content was maintained at 39% by volume (590 kg/m ) of concrete and fine
aggregate content at
3
45% by volume of mortar in concrete (910 kg/ m ), the w/p ratio was kept at 0.410.44 by
weight with air-content being assumed to be 2%. A polycarboxylic ether based superplasticizer
complying with ASTM C 494 type F, with density approximately 1.10 and pH approximately 5.0
was used. The coarse and fine aggregates had a specific gravity of 2.67, and water absorptions of
0.95% and 0.90%, respectively. The mixes were prepared with five percentages of class F fly ash
3 3 3 3 3
(15%; 85 kg/m , 20%; 110 kg/m , 25%; 135 kg/m , 30%; 165 kg/m and 35%; 195 kg/m
respectively).

The compressive strength tests results of SCC mixes are given in Table 3.8 and shown in Fig.
3.4. With the increase in fly ash content from 1535%, SCC mixes developed compressive
strengths between 29.5 and 22.8 MPa at 7 day; between 35.2 and 29.6 at 28 day; between 58.9
and 40.8 at 90 day; and between 61.2 and 43.7 MPa at 365 day. The compressive strength
increased with a decrease in the percentage of the fly ash and the water-to-cementitious materials
ratio. An increase of about 18% strength at 28 days and 40% at 365 days was observed with the
decrease of fly ash content from 35% (SCC5) to 15% (SCC1).
 Table 3.8 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes. (Siddique ,2010)

Mix Compressive Strength (MPa)

7 days 28 days 90 days 365days

SCC1 29.55 35.19 58.99 61.24

SCC2 27.99 33.15 52.86 54.60
SCC3 25.52 31.47 43.76 46.67
SCC4 23.98 30.66 41.96 44.87
SCC5 22.78 29.62 40.88 43.73

70

60

50
Strength (MPa)

35 % FA
40
Compressive

30 % FA
30 25 % FA
20 % FA
20
15 % FA
10

0
7 28 90 365
Age
(Days)

Fig. 3.4 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes at various ages. (Siddique

,2010)

Khaloo et al. (1999) investigated the influence of silica fume on compressive strength
and durability of concrete. The percentage of silica fume was between 1% and 15% and the
water- cement ratios ranged from 0.3 to 0.6. The coarse and fine aggregates consisted of river
gravel and sand with maximum size of 25 mm and 5 mm, respectively. The test results
indicated that 5 to 10 percent by mass replacement of silica fume for cement provided the
highest strength for short and long terms. Compressive strength of silica fume concrete at 28
days compared to conventional concrete increased by 20 to 40 percent, for all the variables
considered.
Grdic et al. (2010) gave compressive strength results conducted on self compacting
concrete prepared by replacing coarse aggregates with recycled aggregates in different
proportions . For making of concrete mixture the fractions of 0/4, 4/8 and 8/16 mm of the
river aggregate were used, and the fractions 4/8 and 8/16 of recycled aggregate. They
prepared three series of mix with 0%, 50% and 100% replacement of coarse aggregate with
recycled aggregates respectively.
3
Proportions used of recycled aggregates of fraction 4/8 and 8/16 was kept constant to 429 kg/m
3
in all three mixes. Limestone filler of specific gravity 2.692 g/cm was used in proportion 260
3
kg/m for all the mixes. Results of compressive strength test are shown below in Fig. 3.5.

60

50
Compressive Strength

40

30 2 days
7 days
(N/mm2)

20 28 days

10

0
E P50
P100
Tpye Of
Concrete

Fig. 3.5 : Graphic presentation of compressive strength test results (Grdic

et al., 2010)

All three mixtures quickly gain early strength, and after 7 days they achieve more than
90% of the strength they have at the age of 28 days, which is the result of implementation of
limestone filler. The explanation of the certain reduction of strength in those concretes with
recycled aggregate lie in this aggregates concrete microstructure. Namely, the main problem of
application of recycled aggregate is its changeable and irregular and inconsistent quality,
especially in the cases of the aggregate obtained by demolition of structural elements of a
building.

Gesoglu et al. (2009) studied compressive strength of self compacting concrete

incorporating fly ash, groung granulated blast furnance slag and silica fume. A total of 22
concrete mixtures were designed having a constant water/binder ratio of 0.44 and a total
binder content of 450
 3
kg/m . The control mixture included only a Portland cement (PC) as the binder while the
remaining mixtures incorporated binary, ternary, and quaternary cementitious blends of PC, fly
ash (FA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (S), and silica fume (SF). The replacement levels
for both FA and S were 20%, 40% and 60% while those of SF were 5%, 10% and 15% by weight
3
of cement. Proprtion of cement used ranges from 180 to 450 kg/m for different mixtures.
Proportions of fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag and silica fume are in range of 0
3 3 3
270 kg/m , 0 270 kg/m and 0 67.5 kg/m
respectively.
Compressive strength of various concrete mixtures are given in Table 3.9. The compressive
strength of SCCs was in the range of 42.5 78.0 MPa. The binary use of PC + FA reduced
compressive strength of SCCs with increasing the replacement level of FA. Replacing PC with
60% FA caused a reduction in the compressive strength of about 40%. However, this adverse
effect of FA seemed to be remedied by the combined use of the mineral admixtures.
Interestingly, the concrete containing 10% FA and 10% S achieved the highest compressive
strength of all 22 mixtures. There was a gradual decrease in the compressive strength of the
concretes having ternary and/or quaternary blends including FA. Therefore, the test results
suggested that it was the FA among the mineral admixtures used that governed the reduction in
the compressive strength of the SCCs.

Table 3.9 : Compressive strength results (Gesoglu et al., 2009)

Mix Compressive strength (MPa)

Control - PC 73.6
20FA 68.0
40FA 60.3
60FA 42.5
20S 72.6
40S 74.9
60S 65.7
5SF 71.2
10SF 76.1
15SF 74.8
15FA5SF 67.2
30FA10SF 57.6
45FA15SF 44.9
15S5SF 68.0
30S10SF 68.2
45S15SF 70.7
10FA10S 78.0
20FA20S 69.2
30FA30S 60.6
7.5FA7.5S5SF 76.0
15FA15S10SF 66.8
22.5FA22.5S15SF 55.2
Naik And Singh (1997) conducted tests on concretes containg 15% and 25% by mass
Class F and Class C fly ashes, to evaluate compressive strength. The effects of moisture and
temperature during curing were also examined. The results of the research showed that
concretes containing Class C fly ash and were moist cured at 73F (23C) developed higher
early age (1 to 14 days) compressive strengths than concretes with Class F fly ash. The long-
term (90 days and greater) compressive strength of concretes containing fly ash was not
significantly influenced by the class of fly ash. The air-cured concretes containing Class F
fly ash did not develop strengths equivalent to air-cured normal concretes and air-cured
concretes containing Class C fly ash developed relatively greater compressive strengths than
air-cured concretes containing Class F fly ash. For concretes containing either class of fly
ash, compressive strengths at 7 days increased with an increase in curing temperature.

Gesoglu And Guneyisi (2011) studied compressive strength of self compacting

rubberized concretes with and without fly ash. At a watercementitious material (w/cm) ratio
of 0.35, the self-compacting concretes (SCCs) were produced by replacing the fine
aggregate with four designated crump rubber contents of 0%, 5%, 15%, and 25% by
fine aggregate volume. Moreover, the SCCs with fly ash were produced by partial substitution
of cement with fly ash at varying amounts of 20% to 60%. Fly ash used was class F fly ash
(FA) as per ASTM C618 such that the total amount of SiO2, Al2O3, and Fe2O3 content was
about 83%. Four different series of self-compacting rubberized concrete (SCRC) mixtures were
designed with a constant water
3
cementitious material (w/cm) ratio of 0.35 and total cementitious materials content of 550 kg/m .
The first group of mixtures was designed to have only portland cement as the binder (550
kg/m3). However, the second, the third, and the fourth series of the mixtures contained fly ash
3 3
partially replaced with portland cement at 20% (110 kg/m ), 40% (220 kg/m ), and 60% (330
3 3
kg/m ) levels by weight. Proportion of crump rubber lies in range 0 to 128.1 kg/m .

Compression test was conducted on the 150 mm cube specimens. The overall compressive
strength ranged from 16.2 to 71.3 MPa and from 20.8 to 86.7 MPa at 28 and 90 days,
respectively. It was evident that there was a marked reduction in the compressive strength of
concretes with increasing rubber content, irrespective of the testing age.

Previous studies have shown that the use of mineral admixtures such as fly ash and blast furnace
slag could increase the slump of the concrete mix without increasing its cost, while reducing the
dosage of superplasticizer needed to obtain similar slump flow compared to concrete made with
Portland cement only (Yahia et al.,1999). Also, the use of fly ash improves rheological properties
and reduces the cracking potential of concrete as it lowers the heat of hydration of the cement
(Kurita et al.,1998). Studies have shown that fly ash replacement up to 30% results in a
significant improvement of the rheological properties of flowing concretes (Kim et al.,1996) .
3.2.2 Tensile
Strength

Siddique (2010) studied tensile strength of self compacting concrete using class F fly ash.
3
Five concrete mixes were made, which had total powder content to 550 kg/m (cement + fly
3
ash). The mixes were prepared with five percentages of class F fly ash (15%; 85 kg/m , 20%;
3
110 kg/m ,
3 3 3
25%; 135 kg/m , 30%; 165 kg/m and 35%; 195 kg/m respectively). Proportions of cement
are
3
465, 440, 415, 385 and 255 kg/m respectively. Coarse aggregate content was maintained at 39%
3
by volume (590 kg/m ) of concrete and fine aggregate content at 45% by volume of mortar in
3
concrete (910 kg/ m ), the w/p ratio was kept at 0.410.44

Splitting tensile strength test results of SCC mixes are given in Table 3.10, and shown in Fig 3.6.
SCC mixes achieved splitting tensile strength from 1.55 to 2.40, 1.76 to 2.68, and 2.12 to 2.96
MPa at 28, 90 and 365 days, with the increase in fly ash content from 15 to 35%. Splitting tensile
strength increased with a decrease in the percentage of the fly ash and the water-to-cementitious
materials ratio.

Table 3.10 : Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes.

(Siddique ,2010)

Mix Splitting tensile strength

28 day 90 day 365 day

SCC1 2.40 2.68 2.96

SCC2 2.12 2.44 2.61

SCC3 1.83 2.12 2.33

SCC4 1.76 1.97 2.26

SCC5 1.55 1.76 2.12

With the increase in cement content, the strength of SCC1 (15% fly ash) gradually increased to
2.40 MPa at 28 days. An increase of about 54% of strength at 28 days and 40% at 365 days was
observed with the decrease of the fly ash contents from 35% (SCC5) to 15% (SCC1). As the
percentage of fly ash in mixes decreased, the tensile strength increased at all ages.
 3.5

2.5
35 % FA
2
30 % FA
25 % FA
1.5
20 % FA

1 15 % FA

0.5

0
28 90 365

Fig. 3.6 : Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes.

(Siddique, 2010)

Kou And Poon (2009) reported tensile strength of self compacting concrete using
recycled fine and coarse aggregates. They prepared three series of SCC mixtures with different
fine recycled aggregate contents and water-to-binder (W/B) ratios. Ordinary Portland cement
and fly ash (FA) were used as the cementitious materials in the SCC mixtures. Two types of fly
ash was used, the first one was a fine fly ash (f-FA) which complied with BS 3892 with
most of the particles passing through the 45 m sieve. The other one was the rejected fly ash
(r-FA) with most of the particles >45 m.

In Series I, five SCC mixtures were prepared and a W/B ratio of 0.53 was used for all the
concrete mixtures. No f-FA was added. The fine recycled aggregates were used as 0, 25, 50, 75
and 100% by volume replacements of the river sand. In Series II, five SCC mixtures were
3
prepared with a W/B ratio of 0.44. 70 kg/m of f-FA was added to increase the cementitious
materials content. Similarly, the fine recycled aggregates were also used as 0, 25, 50, 75 and
100% by volume replacements of the fine natural aggregates. In Series III mixtures, 100% fine
recycled aggregates were used to replace river sand and three W/B ratios of 0.44, 0.40 and 0.35
were employed. In all the concrete mixtures, the cement and r-FA contents were kept constant at
3 3
levels of 340 kg/m and 200 kg/m respectively.

Splitting tensile strengths of concrete were measured using a Denison compression machine with
a loading capacity of 3000 kN according to BS 1881 Part 116 and 117,respectively. The splitting
tensile strength test was carried out on the concrete specimens at the age of 28 days. The results
of the tensile splitting strength of the SCC mixtures in Series I, II and III at 28 days are shown
Fig. 3.7. Each presented value is the average of three measurements. It can be seen that the 28-
day tensile splitting strengths of the RA-SCC mixtures in Series I were slightly lower than that of
the control-1 mixture. But the tensile splitting strengths of the Series II mixes were higher than
that of the control-2, as was seen for compressive strengths.

4
3.5
3
2.5
Splitting Tensile
Strength (MPa)

2
1.5 Series
1 I
0.5 Series
0 II
Series
III

Mix
Notaion

Fig. 3.7 : Splitting tensile strength of RA-SCC in Series I, II, and III at 28
days. (Kou And
Poon,
2009)

Sahmaran et al. (2009) studied the tensile strength of self compacting concrete using
fly ash. Spilt tensile strength tests were carried out at 28, 90 and 180 days respectively. The
split tensile strength ranges from 3.21 to 5.07 MPa, 3.64 to 5.14 MPa and 4.19 to 5.64 MPa at
28, 90 and 180 days, respectively. The split tensile strength of all SCC mixtures increased with
age. The results showed that, an increase in the FA content decreased the split tensile
strength of the SCC especially at 28 days. SCC mixtures containing 3050% FA replacement
showed higher split tensile strength than SCC mixtures containing 6070% FA replacement.
The mixtures containing
6070% FA showed lower tensile strength probably due to the weaker bond between the matrix
and the aggregates.
Grdic et al. (2010) gave tensile strength results conducted on self compacting
concrete prepared by replacing coarse aggregates with recycled aggregates in different
proportions (0% ,
50% and 100% replacement). For making of concrete mixture, the fractions of 0/4, 4/8 and 8/16
mm of the river aggregate were used, and the fractions 4/8 and 8/16 of recycled aggregate .
They prepared three series of mix with 0%, 50% and 100% replacement of coarse aggregate
with recycled aggregates respectively. Proportions used of recycled aggregates of fraction 4/8
and
3
8/16 was kept constant to 429 kg/m in all three mixes. Limestone filler of specific gravity
2.692
3 3
g/cm was used in proportion 260 kg/m for all the mixes Results are shown below in Fig.
3.8. Results of the tensile strength testing by bending indicate that hardness of control concrete
after
2
28 days is higher for 0.18 N/ mm or 2.49% in respect to the concrete with 50% of coarse
2
recycled aggregated and for 1.01 N/mm or 13.95% in comparison to the concrete with
100%
of coarse recycled aggregate. This reduction of strength was caused, by the
changes in the concrete microstructure.

Tensile
strength
8

6
Tensile Strength

4
(N/mm2)

3 Tensile strength

0
E P50
P100
Type Of
Concrete

Fig. 3.8 : Tensile strength of SCC (Grdic et

al., 2010)

Qian and Li (2001) investigated the tensile strength of concrete incorporating 0, 5, 10,
and
15% metakaolin as partial replacement of cement. Metakaolin had specific surface area 12000
2
m /kg, and its average particle diameter was 2.23 m. 30010020 mm samples were tested
under direct tension. Tests were conducted at the age of 28 days. Tensile strength test results are
presented in Table 3.11. The results showed that tensile strength of concrete increased
systematically with increasing metakaolin replacement level. The average tensile strength
increases were 7% (5% metakaolin), 16% (10% metakaolin), and 28% (15% metakaolin), and
the average ultimate strain increases were 3%(5%metakaolin), 19%(10%metakaolin), and 27%
(15% metakaolin). The tensile elasticity modulus for these specimens is in the range from 26 to
27 GPa.
Table 3.11 : Tensile strength of SCC (Qian and Li ,2001)

Age (Days) Tensile Strength

MK (0%) MK (5%) (MPa)
MK (10%) MK (15%)
28 3.35 3.58 3.88 4.29

Dehwah (2012) presents the results of a study conducted to evaluate the mechanical
properties of self-compacting concrete (SCC) prepared using quarry dust powder (QDP), silica
fume (SF) plus QDP or only fly ash (FA). Trials were conducted to assess the proportions of
QDP, SF + QDP or FA required for producing SCC meeting the flow criteria. SCC specimens
were prepared and tested for compressive strength, pulse velocity, split tensile strength and
flexural strength. The results indicated that the mechanical properties of SCC incorporating
QDP (810%) were equal to or better than those of SCC prepared with either SF plus QDP or
FA alone. The use of QDP alone results in a significant cost saving in regions where SF and
FA have to be imported from other countries.

3.3. Durabilty
Properties

3.3.1 Sulphate
Resistance:

Solution of sulphate can attack the hardened cement paste in the concrete causing
deterioration. The precise chemical reaction will depend on the nature of the sulphate present and
the type of cement. In some clay soils the ground water is solution of magnesium and calcium
sulphates. These salts reacts with the Ca(OH)2 and the calcium aluminate hydrate in the concrete
to produce gypsum and calcium sulphoaluminate. These products have considerably have greater
volume than the compounds they replace, leading to expansion and disruption of the concrete.
Sea water and de-icing salt also contain appreciable concentarions of sulphates. The rate and
extent of sulphate attack depend upon the ease with which sulphate ions are able to penetrate the
concrete and upon the chemical resistance of cement paste.

There have been numerous field studies on the distress caused to concrete structures generated
by sulphate attack . In particular, volume of cementitious paste (3440%) and the larger powder
content (400600 kg/m3) of SCC can make it particularly vulnerable to chemical attack, for
example by sulphate solutions. Since the last decade, SCC has been widely used in areas
vulnerable to sulphate attack such as substructures, infrastructure and industrial floors. Sulphate
attack has often been discussed in terms of the reaction between the hydrates in cement pastes
and dissolved compounds, such as sodium sulphate or magnesium sulphate, in the attacking
solution (Taylor 1997).

The classical form of sulphate attack involves alkali sulphates such as sodium sulphate which
reacts with calcium hydroxide and calcium aluminate hydrate to form gypsum and ettringite. The
gypsum and ettringite formed as a result of sulphate attack is significantly more voluminous
(1.22.2 times) than the initial reactants, which can cause expansion, cracking, and deterioration
of concrete by the reaction of SO2_4 ions (Bonen, 1993). A magnesium sulphate solution may
cause the deterioration of concrete due to the formation of Mg-containing hydrates (e.g. MSH
gel), as well as gypsum and thaumasite. Some researchers have reported on the sulphate
resistance imparted by mineral admixtures, which is generally incorporated in concrete to
improve its engineering properties and durability.

Uysal And Sumer (2011) investigated effect of different mineral admixtures on the
sulphate resisstance of self compacting concrete. They prepared sixteen series of mix
proportions, of which one is control, and fifteen were prepared by replacing Portland
3
cement with fly ash (FA)(15%, 25% and 35%) (proportion used is 83, 138, 193 kg/m
3
respectively) granulated blast furnace slag (GBFS)(20%, 40% and 60%) (110, 220, 330 kg/m
3
respectively) limestone powder (LP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110 165 kg/m respectively),
basalt powder (BP)(10%, 20% and
3
30%) (55, 110, 165 kg/m respectively) and marble powder (MP)(10%, 20% and 30%) (55, 110,
3
165 kg/m respectively). A natural river sand and crushed limestone with a maximum size of 16
mm was used as fine and coarse aggregates respectively. The total powder content was fixed to
3
550 kg/m and the waterpowder ratio (w/p) was selected as 0.33 Experimental results of
sulphate resistance include reduction in compressive strength loss and visual examination which
have been subjected to 10% sodium and 10% magnesium sulphate solutions for 400 days.
The deterioration of the SCC cube specimens was investigated by determining the
compressive strength loss, which was calculated as follows:

Compressive strength loss (%)= [(A-B)/A]x100

Where,

A is the average compressive strength of SCC specimens cured in tap water (MPa) and,
B is the average compressive strength of SCC specimens immersed in test solutions (MPa) for
the same period.
Visual examination : It was observed (Fig. 3.9) that a small amount of spalling at edges and
corners of the GBFS40 specimen which showed the best performance exposed to 10%
magnesium sulphate solution for 400 days. A white substance was deposited on the face of the

Fig. 3.9 : (a) The best case (GBFS40 specimen) and (b) the worst case
(control specimen) of specimens in 10% magnesium sulphate solution after
400 days exposure. (Uysal And Sumer, 2011)

Fig. 3.10 : (a) The best case (GBFS40 specimen) and (b) the worst case
(MP10 specimen) of specimens in 10% sodium sulphate solution after 400
days exposure. (Uysal And Sumer,
2011
)
control specimen it was affected the worst in this solution exhibited relatively severe spalling at
edges and corners.

After 400 days of immersion in sodium sulphate solution (Fig. 3.10), the visual examination of
the GBFS40 specimen showed no visible deterioration with no detectable weight loss.
Furthermore, the MP10 specimen exhibited visible deterioration spalling concrete especially at
the corners and edges and some cracking.The visual examination of SCC specimens stored in the
magnesium and sodium sulphate solutions for 400 days, indicated that the intensity of the
damage by magnesium sulphate attack was greater than sodium sulphate attack.

Compressive strength loss : The evalution of the strength loss of SCC specimens placed in
sodium sulphate and magnesium sulphate solutions is shown in Fig. 3.11 and 3.12, respectively.
As can be seen from figures below , these strength results are discussed in terms of strength loss
in order to highlight the damage caused to SCC mixtures by exposure to sulphate attack.

After 400 days exposure in the MgSO4 solution, the amounts of strength loss have been
measured in the range of 4.5513.09% for SCC mixtures. The strength loss decreased as the
replacement of mineral admixtures increased. It is clear that the mixtures containing GBFS
exhibited a much better resistance to magnesium sulphate attack than the mixtures containing
other mineral admixtures. Moreover, these results indicate that the incorporation of mineral
admixtures leads to reduced strength loss compared with those having only PC (control).

Similarly, GBFS series exihibit best resistance to sodium sulphate also. However, FA series
performed very well resistance to sodium sulphate attack and showed lower strength loss than
other series. The amounts of strength loss have been measured in the order of 1.529.68% for
SCC mixtures, after 400 days exposure in the NaSO4 solution. Test results showed that the
incorporation of mineral admixtures led to reduced strength loss compared with those having
only PC (control) except MP10 specimen.

According to test results, control specimen had the highest strength loss among all the series in
magnesium sulphate environments. The main reason of strength loss of control specimen that
ettringite and gypsum formation caused spalling and cracking, while destruction of CSH
caused softening and disintegration.
 14

12
Compressive Strength

10

8
Series 1
6
Loss (%)

Series 2
4
Series 3
2

0
Control FA15 GBFS2 LP10 BP10 MP10
FA25 0 LP20 BP20 MP20
FA35 GBFS4 LP3 BP3 MP30
0 0 0
GBFS6
0
Concrete
Type

Fig. 3.11 : Compressive strength loss of SCC mixtures subjected to sulphate

attack in 10%
magnesium sulphate solution. (Uysal And
Sumer, 2011)

10
9
Compressive Strength

8
7
6
5
4 Series 1
Loss (%)

3 Series 2
2 Series 3
1
0
Control FA15
FA25 GBFS2 LP10 BP10 MP1
FA35 0 LP20 BP20 0
GBFS4 LP3 BP3 MP2
0 0 0 0
GBFS6 MP3
0 0
Concrete
Type
Fig. 3.12 : Compressive strength loss of SCC mixtures subjected to sulphate
attack in 10%
sodium sulphate solution. (Uysal And
Sumer, 2011)
Kathirvel et al. (2010) Their investigation aims to study the durability of SCC with
partial replacement of cement by Quarry and limestone (dust) powder. They replaced Ordinary
portland cement (53 Grade) 10%, 20% and 30% by limestone powder and quarry dust
respectively. Limestone powder with particle size less than 0.125 mm having a specific gravity
of 2.53 was used. The specific gravity of crusher dust is 2.30. Mix proportions of cement and
filler is 214.24
3 3
kg/m and 200 kg/m respectively. High performance concrete superplasticizer, Conplast
SP430
was used to reduce water cement ratio for a required workability. Glenium Stream 2 is a
viscosity modifying admixture which is used in combination with the Super Plasticizers in order
to guarantee maximum efficiency. Ressistance to sulphate attack was measured in terms of
decrease in compressive strength.

Fig. 3.13 and 3.14 shows the comparison of compressive strength of cubes (Quary Dust) placed
in water and 5% of Sodium sulphate solution. At 90 days the compressive strength of control
specimens, 1QD, 2QD, 3QD decreased by 1.7%, 1%, 1.7% and 2.3% respectively. For 120 days
test results the decrease in compressive strength of control specimens, 1QD, 2QD, 3QD is by
2.2%, 2%, 2.3% and 2.5% respectively. Here the decrease in compressive strength of SCS and

40

35
Compressive Strength

30

25
Control Specimen
20
10% QD
(N/mm2)

15 20% QD

10 30% QD

0
30 days 60 days 90 days 120
days
Day
s

Fig. 3.13 : Compressive strength of cubes (QD) in water ( Kathirvel et

al.,2010)
 40

35
Compressive Strength

30

25
Control Specimen
20
10% QD
(N/mm2)

15 20% QD

10 30 % QD

0
30 60 90 120
Day
s

Fig. 3.14 : Compressive strength of cubes (QD) in sodium sulphate solution

(Kathirvel et al.,
2010
)

40

35
Compressive Strength

30

25
Control Specimen
20
10% LP
15
(N/mm2)

20% LP

10 30% LP

0
30 60 90 120
Day
s

Fig. 3.15 : Compressive strength of cubes (LP) in water ( Kathirvel et al.,

2010)
 40

35
Compressive Strength

30

25
Control Specimen
20
10 % LP
15
(N/mm2)

20% LP

10 30 % LP

0
30 60 90 120
Day
s

Fig. 3.16 : Compressive Strength of cubes (LP) sodium sulphate solution

( Kathirvel et al.,
2010
)
3QD is high when compared to other specimens. The specimen 1QD shows good resistant to
sulphate attack when compared to other specimens.

The compressive strength of the specimens, SCS, 1LP, 2LP and 3LP decreases by an average of
0.4%, 0.7% for 28 and 60 days respectively (Fig. 3.15 and 3.16). The decrease in compressive
strength of the specimens SCS, 1LP, 2LP and 3LP at 90 days decreases by 1.7%, 0.6%, 1.3% and
2.7% respectively. By the 120 days results the SCS and 3LP specimen decreases by 2.2% and
3.5% respectively. The decrease in compressive strength is high when compared to 1LP and 2LP
specimens. The compressive strength of the specimens 1LP shows slight decrease in strength by
1.5% showing good resistance to sulphate attack when compared to other specimens.

Bassuoni And Nehdi (2007) Self compacting concrete (SCC) is increasingly being
used in numerous concrete applications some of which are vulnerable to sulfuric acid
attack. The mixture design of SCC is different than that of normal concrete, and thus its long-
term durability characteristics are still uncertain. Their study aims at investigating the
resistance of a variable range of SCC mixture designs to sulfuric acid attack. The main
test variables include the cementitious materials type (single, binary, ternary and quaternary
binders), the sand-to-total aggregates mass ratio, and the inclusion of fibre reinforcement
(single and hybrid). The investigation comprised two consecutive 6-week phases of
immersion of test specimens in sulfuric acid solutions with a maximum pH threshold of 2.5
and 1.0, respectively. In total 24
SCC mixtures were tested. The study reveals that the rate of attack, as expressed by mass loss
versus time, is controlled by different factors at each exposure phase. The advantages of blended
binders and hybrid (steel + polypropylene) fibres in improving the resistance of SCC to sulfuric
acid attack are highlighted.

Persson (2003) did a laboratory study on sulphate resistance of self-compacting

concrete (SCC). For this purpose, more than 40 cylinders of concrete were subjected to a
solution with sodium sulphate, sea or distilled water during 900 days. Age at start of testing was
either 28 or 90 days. Weight and internal fundamental frequency (IFF) were measured.
Comparison was done with the corresponding properties of vibrated concrete (VC). When cured
in a solution with sodium sulphate, the results show larger loss of mass of SCC than that of VC
probably due to the limestone filler content in SCC. After curing in water, sea or distilled, no
such weight difference between the curing types was observe. IFF did not decrease or differ
between the two types of concrete, i.e. no internal deterioration took place due to
thaumasite sulphate attack (TSA) during the 900 days of exposure.

El-Dieb (2009) invesitigated effect of steel fibres in different volume fraction on

durability of high strength self compacting concrete made of local available material.
Durability of the concrete in high sulfate and high temperature condition (i.e. resembling Gulf
environment) is evaluated. Test results indicate that local material can produce UHSFRC.
The ductility of the concrete is greatly improved by the incorporation of steel fibers and
increases as the fiber volume increases. The inclusion of steel fibers did not have significant
effect on the durability of the concrete in the sulfate environment.
Microstructural investigations of UHS FRC
concrete were also performed.
4. Experimental Programmes
In the experimental program, the comparison of the properties of Self Compacting concrete
made with and without silica fume and metakolin, used as supplementary cementing material is
done. Discussion about the material used is done in this chapter. The basic tests carried out on
concrete samples in plastic stage are also discussed in this chapter, followed by a brief
description about mix deign and curing procedure adopted. Then the various tests conducted on
the specimens are discussed.

4.1 Material used

In this section a brief discussion is done on the material used in this work. Various tests
performed on this material are also discussed.

4.1.1 Cement

Cement is a fine, grey powder. The basic composition of cement is given below in Table 4.1.
Cement is mixed with water and materials such as sand, gravel, and crushed stone to make
concrete. The cement and water form a paste that binds the other materials together as the
concrete hardens..

Table 4.1 : Composition of Portland cement

Ingredient % Content

CaO(Lime) 60-67

SiO2 (Silica) 17-25

Al2 O3(Alumina) 3-8

Fe2 O3 (Iron Oxide) 0.5-6

MgO(Magnesia) 0.1-4

Alkalies 0.4-1.3

Sulphur 1-3

In this work J.K. cement of 43 grade was used for casting cubes and cylinders for all concrete
mixes. The cement was of uniform color i.e. grey with a light greenish shade and was free from
any hard lumps. The various tests conducted on cement are initial and final setting time, specific
gravity, fineness and compressive strength. The results of above said tests are given below in
Table 4.2 and 4.3.

Table 4.2 : Physical Properties of Cement

Test Conducted Values Standard values

Obtained
Initial Setting time 42 min Not <
30 minutes
Final Setting time 310 min Not >
600 minutes
Fineness 4.9 % <10
Specific gravity 3.09 -

Table 4.3 : Compressive strength of cement

Days Specimen Compressive Strength Average

2
(N/mm ) Compressive
2
Strength (N/mm )
7 1 35.2
2 36.1 35.3
3 34.7
28 1 42.8
2 44.1 44.1
3 45.3

It can be observed from tables that all the results satisfy the standard criteria.

4.1.2. Fine
Aggregates

The sand used for the work was locally procured and conformed to Indian Standard
Specifications IS: 383-1970. The sand was sieved through 4.75 mm sieve to remove any particles
greater than 4.75 mm. The various other tests conducted are specific density, bulk density,
fineness modulus, water absorption and sieve analysis. The results are given below in Table 4.4
and 4.5. The fine aggregated belonged to grading zone III.
 Table 4.4 : Physical Properties of fine aggregates

Characteristics Value

Specific gravity 2.51

Bulk density 1.3
Fineness modulus 2.62
Water absorption 0.89

Table 4.5 : Sieve analysis of fine aggregate

Sieve Mass Percentage Cumulative Percent
Size retained Retained Percentage Passing
Retained
4.75mm 5.0 0.5 0.5 99.5
2.36 78.0 7.80 8.30 91.7
1.18 185.0 18.5 26.80 73.2
600m 227.0 22.7 49.50 50.5
300m 281.0 28.1 77.6 22.4
150m 223.8 22.38 99.98 0.20
2.50 0.20 0.20 =262.68

Total weight taken = 1000gm

Fineness Modulus of sand = 2.62

4.1.3 Coarse
Aggregates
The material which is retained on IS sieve no. 4.75 is termed as a coarse aggregate. The crushed
stone is generally used as a coarse aggregate. The nature of work decides the maximum size of
the coarse aggregate. Locally available coarse aggregate having the maximum size of 10 mm
was used in this work. The aggregates were washed to remove dust and dirt and were dried to
surface dry condition. The aggregates were tested as per IS: 383-1970. The results of various
tests conducted on coarse aggregate are given in Table 4.6 and 4.7.
 Table 4.6 : Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (10 mm)

Characteristics Value

Type Crushed

Specific Gravity 2.66

Total Water Absorption 0.56

Fineness Modulus 6.83

Table 4.7 : Sieve Analysis of Coarse Aggregates (10mm)

Mass Cumulative
Sieve Percentage Percent
Retained Percentage
Size Retained Passing
(gm) Retained
20 mm 0 0 0 100
10 mm 2516 83.89 83.87 16.13
4.75 474 15.8 99.67 0.33
PAN 10 0.33 = 183.54

Total weight taken = 3Kg

FM of 10 mm Coarse aggregate = 183.54+500 =6.83
100
4.1.4
Water
Generally, water that is suitable for drinking is satisfactory for use in concrete. Water from lakes
and streams that contain marine life also usually is suitable. When water is obtained from sources
mentioned above, no sampling is necessary. When it is suspected that water may contain sewage,
mine water, or wastes from industrial plants or canneries, it should not be used in concrete
unlesstests indicate that it is satisfactory. Water from such sources should be avoided since the
quality of the water could change due to low water or by intermittent tap water is used for
casting.

4.1.5 Silica
Fume
Densified silica fume obtained from Mehtab Pvt. Limited is used in this work. It was grey in
color. It is shown below in Fig. 4.1
 Fig. 4.1 : Silica Fume mixed with cement

4.1.6. Metakolin
Metakolin used in this work was obtained from New delhi. It was white in color and is shown
below in Fig. 4.2.

Fig. 4.2 : Metakolin

4.1.7.
Admixture

Admixture used in this work is Conplast SP430, which complies with IS:9103:1979 and BS:5075
Part 3 and ASTM-C-494 type F as a high range water reducing admixture. Conplast SP 430 is a
ready to use admixture that is added to the concrete at the time of batching. Conplast SP430 is
differentiated from conventional superplasticizers in that it is based on aqueous solution of
lignosulphonates, organic polymer with long lateral chains. This greatly improves
cement dispersion. Conplast SP430 is supplied as brown liquid instantly dispersible in
water and specially formulated to give high water reduction up to 25% without loss of
workability. Specific gravity is 1.22 to 1.225 at 30 degree C.

4.1.8. Magnasium
Sulphate

Powder form of magnesium sulphate was obtained from Scientific Junction, Patiala. It was white
in color. Its solution of strength 5% by adding it to water was made and used for sulphate
resistance test.

Fig. 4.3 : Magnasium Sulphate

4.2
Casting
Before casting, the entire test specimen were cleaned and oiled properly. These were securely
tightened to correct dimensions before casting. Care was taken that there is no gaps left from
where there is any possibility of leakage of slurry. The coarse aggregates and fine aggregates
were weighed first with accuracy. The concrete mixture was prepared by hand mixing on a non-
absorbing platform. On the non-absorbing platform, the coarse and fine aggregates were mixed
thoroughly. To this mixture, the cement was added. These were mixed to uniform color. Then 70
to 80 % water was added by making space in the center and rest was sprinkled on the mix. For
each mix 27 samples were casted, 18 cubes (150 x 150 x 150mm), 9 cubes for compressive
strength at 7, 28 and 56 days while 9 cubes for sulphate resistance and 9 cylinders for splitting
tensile strength at 7, 28 and 56 days.

4.3 Mix Design

The mix designs are given below in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8 : Mix proportions

Mixture
Cement MK SF MK SF Sand C.A Water SP SP
ID 3 3 3 3 3 3 w/p 3
kg/m kg/m Kg/m (%) (%) kg/m kg/m (kg/m ) (kg/m ) (%)

CM 550 0 0 0 0 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

5%SF 522 - 28 - 5 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

10%SF 495 - 55 - 10 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

15%SF 467 - 83 - 15 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

5%MK 522 28 - 5 - 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

10%MK 495 55 - 10 - 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

15%MK 467 83 - 15 - 910 590 265 .48 9.91 1.80

Where,

MK :

Metakolin, SF

: Silica Fume,

CA : Coarse

Aggregates, CM :

Control Mix,

SP : Conplast SP 430
4.4 Tests
Conducted

4.4.1. Fresh Concrete

Tests

A concrete mix can only be classified as Self-compacting Concrete if the requirements for all
three characteristics are fulfilled.
Filling Ability: Ability of to fill a formwork completely under its own weight.
Passing Ability: Ability to overcome obstacles under its own weight without hindrance.
Obstacles are e.g. reinforcement and small openings etc.
Segregation Resistance: Homogeneous composition of concrete during and after the
process of transport and placing.
The various tests performed on fresh concrete to evaluate above given properties in this work are
described below.

4.4.1.1. L- Box Test

Method

The test assesses the flow of the concrete, and also the extent to which it is subject to blocking by
reinforcement. The apparatus is shown below in Fig. 4.4.

Fig. 4.4 : L box. (EFNARC, 2002).

The apparatus consists of a rectangular-section box in the shape of an L, with a vertical and
horizontal section, separated by a moveable gate, in front of which vertical lengths of
reinforcement bar are fitted. The vertical section is filled with concrete, and then the gate lifted to
let the concrete flow into the horizontal section. When the flow has stopped, the height of the
concrete at the end of the horizontal section is expressed as a proportion of that remaining in the
vertical section (H2/H1in the diagram). This is an indication passing ability, or the degree to
which the passage of concrete through the bars is restricted. The horizontal section of the box
can be marked at 200mm and 400mm from the gate and the times taken to reach these points
measured. These are known as the T20 and T40 times and are an indication for the filling ability.
Equipments
L box of a stiff non absorbing material
Trowel
Scoop
Stopwatch

Procedu
re
About 14 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test.
Set the apparatus level on firm ground, ensure that the sliding gate can open freely and
then close it.
Fill the vertical section of the apparatus with the concrete sample.
Leave it to stand for 1 minute.
Lift the sliding gate and allow the concrete to flow out into the horizontal section.
Simultaneously, start the stopwatch and record the times taken for the concrete to reach
the 200 and 400 mm marks.
When the concrete stops flowing, the distances H1 and H2 are measured.
Calculate H2/H1, the blocking ratio.
The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.

Resul
ts
If the concrete flows as freely as water, at rest it will be horizontal, so H2/H1 = 1. Therefore the
nearer this test value, the blocking ratio, is to unity, the better the flow of the concrete. T20 and
T40 times can give some indication of ease of flow, but no suitable values have been generally
agreed.
4.4.1.2 V Funnel
Test
The test is designed to measure flow ability of fresh concrete. The equipment consists of a V-
shaped funnel, shown in Fig. 4.5 The funnel is filled with about 12 litres of concrete and the time
taken for it to flow through the apparatus measured
 Fig. 4.5 : V- Funnel equipment. (EFNARC, 2002).
Equipments
V-funnel
Bucket ( 12 litre )
Trowel
Scoop
Stopwatch

Procedure

About 12 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test, sampled normally.

Set the V-funnel on firm ground.
Moisten the inside surfaces of the funnel.
Close the trap door and place a bucket underneath.
Fill the apparatus completely with concrete without compacting or tamping, simply strike
off the concrete level with the top with the trowel.
Open within 10 sec after filling the trap door and allow the concrete to flow out under
gravity.
Start the stopwatch when the trap door is opened, and record the time for the discharge to
complete (the flow time). This is taken to be when light is seen from above through the
funnel.
The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.

Results
This test measures the ease of flow of the concrete; shorter flow times indicate greater flow
ability. For SCC a flow time of 10 seconds is considered appropriate. The inverted cone shape
restricts flow, and prolonged flow times may give some indication of the susceptibility of the
mix to blocking. After 5 minutes of settling, segregation of concrete will show a less continuous
flow with an increase in flow time.

4.4.1.3 Slump Flow

Test
It is the most commonly used test and is used to assess the horizontal free flow of SCC in the
absence of obstructions. The test method is based on the test method for determining the slump.
The diameter of the concrete circle is a measure for the filling ability of the concrete. It gives no
indication of the ability of the concrete to pass between reinforcement without blocking, but may
give some indication of resistance to segregation. Its equipment is shown below in Fig. 4.6. It
can be argued that the completely free flow, unrestrained by any boundaries, is not representative
of what happens in practice in concrete construction, but the test can be profitably be used to
assess the consistency of supply of ready-mixed concrete to a site from load to load.

Fig. 4.6 : Slump flow test equipment. (EFNARC, 2002).

Equipme
nt
Mould in the shape of a truncated cone with the internal dimensions 200 mm diameter at
the base, 100 mm diameter at the top and a height of 300 mm, conforming to EN 12350-2
Base plate of a stiff non absorbing material, at least 700mm square, marked with a circle
marking the central location for the slump cone, and a further concentric circle of 500mm
diameter
Trowel
Scoop
Ruler
 Stopwatch (optional)

Procedu
re
About 6 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test.
Moisten the base plate and inside of slump cone, Place base plate on level stable ground
and the slump cone centrally on the base plate and hold down firmly.
Fill the cone with the scoop.
Do not tamp, simply strike off the concrete level with the top of the cone with the trowel.
Remove any surplus concrete from around the base of the cone.
Raise the cone vertically and allow the concrete to flow out freely.
Simultaneously, start the stopwatch and record the time taken for the concrete to reach
the 500mm spread circle. (This is the T50 time).
Measure the final diameter of the concrete in two perpendicular directions.
Calculate the average of the two measured diameters. (This is the slump flow in mm).
Resul
ts
The higher the slump flow (SF) value, the greater its ability to fill formwork under its own
weight. A value of at least 650mm is required for SCC. There is no generally accepted advice on
what are reasonable tolerances about a specified value, though 50mm, as with the related flow
table test, might be appropriate. The T50 time is a secondary indication of flow. A lower time
indicates greater flow-ability.

4.4.1.4. U Box
Test
The test is used to measure the filling ability of self-compacting concrete. The apparatus consists
of a vessel that is divided by a middle wall into two compartments, shown by R1 and R2 in Fig.
4.7. An opening with a sliding gate is fitted between the two sections. Reinforcing bars with
nominal diameters of 13 mm are installed at the gate with centre-to-centre spacing of 50 mm.
This creates a clear spacing of 35 mm between the bars. The left hand section is filled with about
20 litre of concrete then the gate lifted and concrete flows upwards into the other section. The
height of the concrete in both sections is measured.
 Fig. 4.7 : U box. (EFNARC, 2002)

Equipment

U box of a stiff non absorbing material see figure 3.1.

Trowel
Scoop
Stopwatch

Procedure
About 20 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test, sampled normally.
Set the apparatus level on firm ground, ensure that the sliding gate can open freely and
then close it.
Moisten the inside surfaces of the apparatus, remove any surplus water.
Fill the one compartment of the apparatus with the concrete sample.
Leave it to stand for 1 minute.
Lift the sliding gate and allow the concrete to flow out into the other compartment.
After the concrete has come to rest, measure the height of the concrete in the
compartment that has been filled, in two places and calculate the mean (H1). Measure
also the height in the other compartment (H2)
Calculate H1 - H2, the filling height.
The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.

Results
If the concrete flows as freely as water, at rest it will be horizontal, so H1 - H2 = 0. Therefore the
nearer this test value is to zero, the better the flow and passing ability of the concrete.
4.4.2. Hardend Concrete
Tests

4.4.2.1 Compressive Strength Test (IS:

516 1959)

This test is performed on cube specimens to determine compressive strength at various ages.

Apparat
us
Testing Machine - The testing machine may be of any reliable type, of sufficient capacity for the
tests and capable of applying the load at the rate specified. The permissible error shall be not
greater than 2 percent of the maximum load. The testing machine shall be equipped with two
steel bearing platens with hardened faces. One of the platens (preferably the one that normally
will bear on the upper surface of the specimen) shall be fitted with a ball seating in the form of a
portion of a sphere, the centre of which coincides with the central point of the face of the platen.
The other compression platen shall be plain rigid bearing block. The bearing faces of both
platens shall be at least as large as, and preferably larger than the nominal size of the specimen to
which the load is applied.
Age at
Test
Tests shall be made at recognized ages of the test specimens, the most usual being 7 and 28 days.
Test at age of 56 days can also be performed. Ages of 13 weeks and one year are recommended
if tests at greater ages are required. Where it may be necessary to obtain the early strengths, tests
may be made at the ages of 24 hours hour and 72 hours 2 hours. The ages shall be
calculated from the time of the addition of water to the dry ingredients.
Number of
Specimens
At least three specimens, preferably from different batches, shall be made for testing at each
selected age.

4.4.2.2 Splitting Tensile Strength Test

(ASTM C496)

This test is performed on cylinder specimen to evaluate its tensile

strength at various different ages.

Apparat
us
Compression Testing Machine
Bearing Strips - 2 each, 1/8 in. thick plywood strips, 1 in. wide (the length shall be slightly
longer that of the specimens). The bearing strips are placed between the specimen
and the upper and lower bearing blocks of the testing machine (or between the
specimen and supplementary bearing bars if used).
Supplementary Bearing Bars - Steel bar 2 in. wide, 3 in. thick, and 12 in. long.
Procedu
re
1) Draw diametric lines on each end of the specimen so that they are in the same axial plane.
2) Centre one of the plywood strips along the centre of the lower bearing block.
3) Place the specimen on the plywood strip and align so that the lines marked on the ends are
vertical and centered over the plywood strip.
4) Place the second plywood strip and the bearing bar so that they are lengthwise on the
cylinder, centered on the previously marked lines on the ends.
5) Apply the load continuously at a constant rate of 100 to 200 psi/minute of splitting tensile
stress until failure occurs (the load rate is 11000 to 22000 lb/minute for 6diameter by 12
long specimens).
6) Record the maximum load at failure.
7) Calculate the splitting tensile strength as follows:
' 2P
f st
ld

Where P is the maximum load at failure in pounds, and l and d are the length and diameter of the
cylindrical specimen, respectively, in inches.
Report
1) Report the type of concrete, unit weight, and unconfined compressive strength.
2) Report the splitting tensile strength to the nearest 5 psi.

4.4.2.3. Sulphate
Resistance Test

Tests performed for sulphate resistance in this work are compressive strength test after
immersing the cube specimen in 5% magnesium sulphate solution for 7, 28 and 56 days. Before
immersing them in sulphate solution, specimens are cured for 28 days in water under normal
temperature. Compressive strength test has been already discussed above in article 4.4.2.1.
5. Result And
Discussion
Here the results of the control concrete and concrete made with replacement of silica fume and
metakolin with cement are discussed. The parameters such as Compressive strength, Splitting
Tensile Strength, Sulphate Resistance are discussed and comparisons between the various mixes
are represented.

5.1 Silica
Fume
In this article effects of replacement of silica fume with cement on concrete are discussed. The
extreme fineness and very high amorphous silicon dioxide content makes silica fume a very
reactive pozzolanic material. As the Portland cement in concrete begins to react chemically, it
releases calcium hydroxide. The silica fume reacts with this calcium hydroxide to form
additional binder material called calcium silicate hydrate, which is very similar to the calcium
silicate hydrate formed from Portland cement. It is an additional binder that gives silica-fume
concrete its improved properties.
Mechanism of silica fume in concrete can be studied basically under three roles:

Pore-size Refinement and Matrix Densification: The presence of silica fume

in the Portland cement concrete mixes causes considerable reduction in the volume of
large pores at all ages. It basically acts as filler due to its fineness and because of which
it fits into spaces between grains in the same way that sand fills the spaces between
particles of coarse aggregates and cement grains fill the spaces between fine aggregates
grains.

Reaction with Free-Lime (From Hydration of Cement) CH crystals in

Portland cement pastes are a source of weakness because cracks can easily propagate
through or within these crystals without any significant resistance affecting the
strength, durability and other properties of concrete. Silica fume which is siliceous and
aluminious material reacts with CH resulting reduction in CH content in addition to
forming strength contributing cementitious products which in other words can be termed
as Pozzolanic Reaction.

Cement PasteAggregate Interfacial Refinement In concrete the

characteristics of the transition zone between the aggregate particles and cement paste
plays a significant role in the cement-aggregate bond. Silica fume addition influences
the thickness of transition phase in mortars and the degree of the orientation of the CH
crystals in it. The thickness compared with mortar containing only ordinary Portland
cement decreases and reduction in degree of orientation of CH crystals in transition phase
with the addition of silica fume. Hence mechanical properties and durability is improved
because of the enhancement in interfacial or bond strength. Mechanism behind is not
only connected to chemical
 formation of CSH (i.e. pozzolanic reaction) at interface, but also to the microstructure
modification (i.e. CH) orientation, porosity and transition zone thickness) as well.
5.1.1 Fresh Concrete
Properties

To study the effect of replacement of cement by silica fume in different proportions on fresh
concrete properties, the SCC containing different proportion of silica fume were tested for Slump
flow, V-funnel, U-Box, and L-box.
The results of fresh properties of all Self-compacting silica fume concretes are included in Table
5.1. The table shows the properties such as slump flow, V-funnel flow times, L-box, U- box. In
terms of slump flow, all SCCs exhibited satisfactory slump flows in the range of 550800 mm,
which is an indication of a good deformability.
As per EFNARC, time ranging from 6 to 12 seconds is considered adequate for a SCC. The V-
funnel flow times were in the range of 811 seconds. Test results of this investigation indicated
that all SCC mixes meet the requirements of allowable flow time. Maximum size of coarse
aggregate was kept as 16 mm in order to avoid blocking effect in the L-box. The gap between re-
bars in L-box test was 35 mm. The L-box ratio H2/H1 for the mixes was above 0.8 which is as
per EFNARC standards. U-box difference in height of concrete in two compartments was in the
range of 540 mm. All the Fresh properties of concrete values were in good agreement to that of
the values given by European guidelines.

Table 5.1 : Fresh Concrete Properties (Silica fume)

Mixture ID Slump V-funnel L-Box U-box(H1-

(mm) (seconds) (H2/H1) H2)

CM 585 11 0.9 34

5% SF 610 11 0.9 34

10% SF 660 10 0.9 40

15% SF 685 8 0.9 35

Fig. 5.1 : Slump Flow Test

Fig. 5.2 : V Funnel Test

5.1.2 Compressive
Strength Test

To study the effect of replacement of silica fume in different proportions with cement on
compressive strength, cube specimens of dimensions 150 x 150 x 150 mm are prepared. The
replacement level of silica fume is 5%, 10% and 15%. Specimens are cured in water and tested at
ages of 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are given below in Table 5.2 and are represented in Fig.
5.3 and 5.4.

50

45

40

35

30
7 Days
25
28 Days

20 56 Days

15

10

0
CM 5% SF 10% SF 15 % SF

Fig. 5.3 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume

 Table 5.2 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume

2
Average Compressive Strength
Compressive Strength (N/mm ) 2
(N/mm )
MIX

56 days 56 days
7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days

31.7
20.7 28.4
31.7
30.9
CM 21.5 30.3 20.6 29.5

32.3
19.6 29.9

39.7
24.9 35.3
38.7
5% SF 25.7 34.1 38.9 24.6 35.1

24.4 35.9 37.5

28.1 39.6 44.2

42.8 43.5
10% SF 26.2 40.3 27.2 39.7

27.4 39.2 43.4

25.1 35.4 40.1

38.8 39.3
24.1 36.1
15% SF 25.3 35.4
26.8 34.9 39.0

21.5 30.3 30.9

50

45

40

35

30 CM
25 5% SF
10%
20
SF
15% SF
15

10

0
7 Days 28 Days 56 Days

Fig 5.4 : Compressive Strength of SCC mixes

Fig. 5.5 : Compressive strength test in progress

The water-cement was kept constant at 0.48. The test results indicated that, when 5 to 10 percent
by weight replacement of silica fume for cement is done, compressive strength increases. When
15% replacement of cement is done by silica fume, strength starts decreasing. Compressive
strength of silica fume concrete at 28 days compared to control mix was increased by 18 to 35
percent with silica fume is added 5 to 10% respectively. While there is 20% increase in 28 days
strength with 15 % replacement when compared to control specimen but there is decrease of
compressive strength when compared to 10% replacement level.

Khaloo et al. (1999) investigated the influence of silica fume on compressive strength
and durability of concrete. The percentage of silica fume was between 1% and 15% and the
water- cement ratios ranged from 0.3 to 0.6. The coarse and fine aggregates consisted of river
gravel and sand with maximum size of 25 mm and 5 mm, respectively. The test results
indicated that 5 to 10 percent by mass replacement of silica fume for cement provided the
highest strength for short and long terms. Compressive strength of silica fume concrete at 28
days compared to conventional concrete increased by 20 to 40 percent, for all the variables
considered.

5.1.3 Splitting Tensile

Strength Test
Split tensile strength studies were carried out at the age of 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are
given below in Table 5.3.

As seen in table, test results indicated that 5 to 10 percent by weight replacement of cement by
silica fumet enhances strength for short and long terms. When we increase the replacement of
silica fume at 15% strength goes on decreasing. There is increase of 20 to 40% splitting tensile
strength of 5% and 10% silica fume concrete respectively, when compared to control mix at age
of 28 days.

These results are represented graphically below in Fig. 5.6 and 5.7.
 Table 5.3 : Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes with Silica fume

2 Average Splitting Tensile Strength

Splitting Tensile Strength (N/mm ) (N/mm )
2
MIX
7 days 28 days 56 days 7 days 28 days 56 days

1.4 1.9 2.1

CM 1.3 2.1 2.0 1.4 2.0 2.2

1.5 2.0 2.2

1.8 2.5 2.9

5% SF 1.7 2.65 2.8 1.7 2.5 2.8

1.6 2.45 2.7

2.0 2.85 3.2

10% SF 1.85 2.75 2.8 2.0 2.75 3.0

2.1 2.65 3.0

1.7 2.7 2.8

15% SF 1.6 2.6 3.0 1.6 2.55 2.9

1.5 2.4 2.9

3.5

2.5

2 7 Days

1.5 28 Days
56 Days
1

0.5

0
CM 5% SF 10% SF 15% SF

Fig. 5.6 : Splitting tensile strength of Silica Fume Concrete

 Fig. 5.7 : Splitting tensile strength test

5.1.4 Resistance to sulphate attack of concrete

This test was conducted on 150 x 150 x 150mm cube specimens. The cubes were casted and
cured in water for 28 days. Magnesium sulphate solution of strength 5% is used to evaluate
sulphate resistance of concrete. Cubes are immersed in solution after 28 days curing, and are
tested for compressive strength at 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are given below in Table
5.4. There was decrease in compressive strength of specimens when compared with their
normal compressive strengths. But when silica fume and metakolin are used as partial
replacements of cement, then this strength loss is minimized.

When this compressive strength is compared with compressive strength of specimens cured
in water at same ages, it is found that there is loss of compressive strength. After immersion
in solution for 28 days, there is 1.5% loss of strength for control specimen. Control specimen
2
simply cured in water has 56 day strength of 31.7 N/mm while those immersed in solution
2
have strength of 31.2 N/mm . When cement is replaced by silica fume, this loss tends to
decrease. 10% replacement level gives the best result. There is loss of .7% strength. While
there is loss of 1.0% and .8% respectively at replacement level of 5% and 15 %
 Fig. 5.8 : Cube specimen placed in 5% MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial curing)

50

45

40

35

30
7 Days
25
28 Days
20 56 Days
15

10

0
CM 5% SF 10% SF 15% SF

Fig. 5.9 : Compressive strength of silica fume concrete after immersion

in 5% MgSo4
solution (After 28 days initial
curing)
 Table 5.4 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes after immersion in MgSo4 solution

Compressive Strength Average Compressive Strength

2 2
(N/mm )(After 28 days curing) (N/mm )(After 28 days curing)
MIX

56 days 56 days
7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days

33.6
29.6 32.3
33.3
32.5
CM 29.1 30.4 29.1 31.2

33.9
28.5 31.0

42.1
35.5 38.0
42.6
5% SF 34.8 39.3 43.3 34.9 38.3

34.3 37.6 42.7

39.6 43.1 46.6

44.8 45.8
10% SF 38.2 42.7 39.4 43.2

39.4 43.8 46.0

35.3 39.0 42.6

43.8 43.1
15% SF 35.7 38.7 35.0 39.0

34.2 39.4 43.0

These results are represented graphically above in Fig. 5.9. While loss in strength results are
represented below in Fig. 5.10.
 % Decrease in compressive
1.6 strength
1.4

1.2

0.8 % Decrease in
compressive strength
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
CM 5% SF 10% SF 15% SF

Fig. 5.10 : Percentage loss of compressive strength after 28 days

immersion in
MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial
curing)

5.2
Metakolin

In this article effects of replacement of metakolin with cement on concrete are discussed.
Metakaolin is a valuable admixture for concrete/cement applications that can enhance the
performance of cementitious composites through high pozzolanic reactivity, much like silica
fume. Metakolin reacts with the calcium hydroxide formed during Portland cement hydration,
creating additional cementitious products which modify the concrete structure and enhance its
overall mechanical and durability performance. Metakaolin has a particle size that is much finer
than cement but not as fine as Silica fume, and it therefore offers better workability and requires
smaller amounts of high-range water-reducing admixture to obtain slump comparable to SF
concrete. It has a creamier texture, generates less bleed water, and has better finishability than
concrete with Silica fume. (Caldarone et al., 1994).

5.2.1 Fresh Concrete

Properties

To know the effect of replacement of cement by metakolin in different proportions on fresh

concrete properties, the SCC containing different proportion of metakolin were tested for Slump
flow, V-funnel, U-Box, and L-box.
The results of fresh properties of all Self-compacting metakolin concretes are included in Table
5.5. The table shows the properties such as slump flow, V-funnel flow times, L-box, U- box. In
terms of slump flow, all SCCs exhibited satisfactory slump flows in the range of 600700 mm,
which is an indication of a good deformability.

Table 5.5 : Fresh Concrete Properties (Metakolin)

Mixture ID Slump V-funnel L-Box U-box(H1-

(mm) (seconds) (H2/H1) H2)

5% MK 630 10 0.80 34

10% MK 620 11 0.82 40

15% MK 620 12 0.90 35

As per EFNARC, time ranging from 6 to 12 seconds is considered adequate for a SCC. The V-
funnel flow times were in the range of 10-12 seconds. Test results of this investigation indicated
that all SCC mixes meet the requirements of allowable flow time. The L-box ratio H2/H1 for the
mixes was above 0.8 which is as per EFNARC standards. U-box difference in height of concrete
in two compartments was in the range of 540 mm. All the fresh properties of concrete values
were in good agreement to that of the values given by European guidelines.

5.2.2 Compressive
Strength Test

To investigate the effect of replacement of metakolin in different proportions with cement on

compressive strength, cube specimens of dimensions 150 x 150 x 150 mm are prepared. The
replacement level of metakolin is 5%, 10% and 15%. Specimens are cured in water and tested at
ages of 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are given below in Table 5.6 and are represented in Fig.
5.11.
 Table 5.6 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes with Metakolin

2
Average Compressive Strength
Compressive Strength (N/mm ) 2
(N/mm )
MIX

56 days 56 days
7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days

31.7
20.7 28.4
31.7
30.9
CM 21.5 30.3 20.6 29.5

32.3
19.6 29.9

37.9
23.0 34.1
37.8
5% MK 24.7 35.4 37.1 23.9 34.8

24.1 34.9 38.5

28.1 40.6 44.4

44.0
29.2 41.2 43.8
10% MK 28.6 40.2

28.7 39.5 44.0

30.4 43.8 46.1

46.5
29.7 43.1 47.2
15% MK 30.3 43.7

30.8 44.3 46.4

 50

45

40

35

30
7 Days
25
28 Days
20 56 Days
15

10

0
CM 5% MK 10% MK 15% MK

Fig. 5.11 : Compressive strength of metakolin concrete

The water-cement was kept constant at 0.48. The test results indicated that, 5 to 15 percent by
weight replacement of metakolin for cement gives better strength at both short and long terms.
Compressive strength of metakolin concrete at 28 days compared to control mix was increased
by 19 to 46 percent with metakolin added 5 to 15% respectively. Increase in compressive
strength in represented graphically below in figure 5.8. Compressive strength of 5% Mk concrete
2
is 23.9, 34.8 and 37.8 N/mm at 7, 28 and 56 days respectively. While that of 15% MK concrete
is 30.3, 43.7 and 46.5 at age of 7, 28 and 56 days respectively. There is roughly 25% increase in
28 day strength , when replacement level of metakolin is increased from 5 to 15%. Percentage
increase in compressive strength is represented below in Fig. 5.12.

Hassan et al.,(2012) investigated the effect of mtakolin replacement on self compacting concrete
and similar results were obtained. Replacement levels was 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 20, and 25%. Constant
w/b ration of 0.4 is used for all mixes. Natural sand and 10 mm maximum size stone were
used as fine and coarse aggregates, respectively. High range water reducer (HRWR) similar to
Type F of ASTM C 494 was used to adjust the flow ability of the SCC mixtures. Results
indicated that there is increase in compressive strength with increase in replacement level of
metakolin.
 % Increase In Compressive Strength
60

50

40

30 % Increase In Compressive
Strength
20

10

0
5% MK 10% MK 15% MK

Fig. 5.12 : Percentage increase in Compressive strength

5.2.3 Tensile Strength Test

Split tensile strength studies were carried out at the age of 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are
given below in Table 5.7 and represented in Fig. 5.13.

3.5

2.5

2 Series 1
Series 2
1.5
Series 3
1

0.5

0
CM 5% MK 10% MK 15% MK

Fig. 5.13 : Splitting tensile strength results of metakolin concrete

 Table 5.7 : Splitting tensile strength of SCC mixes with Metakolin

2 Average Splitting Tensile Strength

Splitting Tensile Strength (N/mm ) (N/mm )
2
MIX
7 days 28 days 56 days 7 days 28 days 56 days

1.4 1.9 2.1

CM 1.3 2.1 2.0 1.4 2.0 2.2

1.5 2.0 2.2

1.8 2.4 2.45

5% MK 1.7 2.25 2.55 1.6 2.35 2.55

1.6 2.35 2.55

2.0 2.8 3.2

10% MK 1.85 2.7 3.1 2.0 2.8 3.1

2.15 2.9 3.0

2.2 3.1 3.2

15% MK 2.3 2.9 3.3 2.2 3.0 3.3

2.1 3.0 3.4

When 5% cement is replaced my metakolin, it gives splitting tensile strength of 1.6, 2.35 and
2
2.55 N/mm at age of 7. 28 and 56 days respectively. At replacement level of 10%, spliiting
2
tensile strength comes to be 2, 2.8 and 3.1 N/mm at age of 7, 28 and 56 days respectively. At
age of 28 days there is 18 to 40% increase in splitting tensile strength, when compared to control
2
mix at same age. Control mix has strength of 2 N/mm at age of 28 days. When replacement
level is further increased to 15% by weight of cement, there is further increase in splitting tensile
strength. It comes out to be 2.2, 3 and 3.3 N/mm2 at age of 7, 28 and 56 days respectively. When
compared to control mix at 28 days there is increase of 50%. While there is increase of 27% and
7% splitting tensile strength at 15% replacement, when compared to 5 and 10% replacement
levels.

5.2.4 Resistance to sulphate attack

of concrete

This test was conducted on 150 x 150 x 150mm cube specimens. The cubes were casted and
cured in water for 28 days. Magnesium sulphate solution of strength 5% is used to evaluate
sulphate resistance of concrete. Cubes are immersed in solution after 28 days curing, and are
tested for compressive strength at 7, 28 and 56 days. Test results are given below in table 5.8.
There was decrease in compressive strength of specimens when compared with their normal
compressive strengths. But when silica fume and metakolin are used as partial replacements of
cement, then this strength loss is minimized.

When this compressive strength is compared with compressive strength of specimens cured in
water at same ages, it is found that there is loss of compressive strength. After immersion in
solution for 28 days, there is 1.5% loss of strength for control specimen. Control specimen
2
simply cured in water has 56 day strength of 31.7 N/mm while those immersed in solution have
2
strength of 31.2 N/mm . When cement is replaced by metakolin, this loss tends to decrease.
Strength results are represented below in Fig. 5.14 and given in Table 5.8. At replacement level
of 5% metakolin, loss of strength is .8%. Strength of 5% MK specimen after immersion in
2
MgSo4 solution for 28 days is 37.5 N/mm , while of the specimen that is cured in simple water is
2
37.8 N/mm . With increase in replacement level upto 10%, loss of strength becomes .7%. When
replacement level is further increased, loss of strength decreases further. Strength of 15%
2
replacement specimen after immersion for 28 days in MgSo4 solution is 46.2 N/mm . Its loss of
strength is approximately .6%, when compared with strength of 15% MK sample cured in water
for 56 days. Loss of strength of specimens after immersion for 28 days in MgSo4 solution,
when

60

50

40

7 Days
30
28 Days
56 Days
20

10

0
CM 5% MK 10% MK 15% MK

Fig. 5.14 : Compressive strength of metakolin concrete after immersion in

5% MgSo4
solution (After 28 days initial
curing)
 Table 5.8 : Compressive strength of SCC mixes after immersion in MgSo4 solution

Compressive Strength Average Compressive Strength

2 2
(N/mm )(After 28 days curing) (N/mm )(After 28 days curing)
MIX

56 days 56 days
7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days

33.6
29.6 32.3
33.3
32.5
CM 29.1 30.4 29.1 31.2

33.9
28.5 31.0

42.1
35.0 38.0
41.5
5% MK 35.6 36.9 40.8 34.6 37.5

33.4 37.6 41.6

40.7 44.5 46.8

45.9 46.8
10% MK 39.4 42.8 40.0 43.7

39.9 43.9 47.6

43.0 46.1 49.1

49.8 49.6
15% MK 44.2 47.0 43.5 46.2

43.3 45.5 49.9

compared with same replacement level specimens cured in simple water for 56 days are
represented graphically below in figure 43.
 % Loss of strength
1.6

1.4

1.2

0.8
% Loss of strength
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
CM 5% MK 10% MK 15% MK

Fig. 5.15 : Percentage loss of compressive strength after 28 days

immersion in
MgSo4 solution (After 28 days initial
curing)

Uysal And Sumer (2011) investigated effect of different mineral admixtures on the
sulphate resisstance of self compacting concrete and obtained similar results. They prepared
sixteen series of mix proportions, of which one is control, and fifteen were prepared by
replacing Portland cement with different mineral admixtures such as fly ash, granulated blast
furnace slag, marble powder, basalt powder and limestone powder. A natural river sand and
crushed limestone with a maximum size of 16 mm was used as fine and coarse aggregates
respectively. Experimental results of sulphate resistance include reduction in compressive
strength loss and visual examination which have been subjected to 10% sodium and 10%
magnesium sulphate solutions for 400 days. Incorporation of mineral admixtures decreases the
loss of strength.

Hassan et al.,(2012) investigated the effect of mtakolin replacement on self compacting concrete
and similar results were obtained. Replacement levels was 3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 20, and 25%. Constant
w/b ration of 0.4 is used for all mixes. Natural sand and 10 mm maximum size stone were
used as fine and coarse aggregates, respectively. High range water reducer (HRWR) similar to
Type F of ASTM C 494 was used to adjust the flow ability of the SCC mixtures. Results
indicated that incorporation of metakolin improves durability properties of self compacting
concrete,
6. Conclusions
Observations made from the above study, using Silica fume and Metakolin are given below :

The above results has shown that it is possible to design an SCC mixes incorporating
silica fume and metakolin content up to 15%. The SCC mixes have a slump flow in the
range of 600700 mm, V-funnel time in the range of 410 s, L-box ratio was greater than
0.8 for all mixes and difference in height of concrete in two compartments in U-box in
the range of 540 mm.

2
The SCC mixes developed compressive strength of 24.6, 27.2 and 25.3 N/mm at 7 days
with silica fume replacement of 5, 10 and 15% respectively. While it achieves strength of
2
35.1, 39.7 and 35.4 N/mm at age of 28 days. At age of 56 days, strength achieved is
2
38.7, 43.5 and 39.3 N/mm respectively. When metakolin is used as supplementary
material in proportions of 5, 10 and 15%, compressive strength achieved at age of 7 days
2 2
is 23.9, 28.6 and 30.3 N/mm . At age of 28 days strength is 34.8, 40.2 and 43.7 N/mm
2
respectively. While at age of 56 days strength achieved is 37.8, 44.0 and 46.5 N/mm .
Compressive strength increases with increase in percentage of metakolin while in case of
silica fume strength increases upto 10% replacement level and then strarts decreasing.

2 2
Splitting tensile strength developed was from 1.7 to 2.0 N/mm , 2.5 to 2.75 N/mm and
2.8 to 3.0 N/mm2 at 7,28, and 56 days, respectively with silica fume content. The SCC
2
mixes developed Splitting tensile strengths ranging from 1.6 to 2.2 N/mm , from 2.35 to
2
3.0 N/mm and 2.55 to 3.3 N/mm2 at 7, 28 and 56 days days respectively with metakolin
content.
Use of silica fume and metakolin as replacements of cement, improves sulphate
resistance of concrete. When measured in terms of compressive strength loss, there is loss
of 1, .7 and .8% strength for 5, 10 and 15% replacement level of silica fume respectively.
While in case of metakolin loss of strength is .8, .7 and .6% for replacement level of 5,
10 and 15% respectively.
Referenc
es

Aitcin, P.,C., (1999). High performance concrete. London: E & FN Spoon.

Anagnostopoulos, N.S., Georgiadis, A.S., And Sideris, K.K., (2007). Carbonation of self
compacting concretes produced with different materials. In: Proceedings of 5th international
RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete. Ghent; pp. 721727.

ASTM C39. (2005). Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete
specimens. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

ASTM C 1012, (2002). Standard test method for length change of hydraulic cement mortar
exposed to a sulfate solution. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials.

Audenaert, K., Boel, V., And Schutter, G.D., (2002). Carbonation of Self Compacting
Concrete 6th International Symposium on High Strength/High Performance Concrete, Leipzig,
pp. 853-862.

Bartos, J. M., (2000). Measurement of Key Properties of Fresh Self-compacting Concrete,

CEN/PNR Workshop, Paris.

Bartos, J.M., Marrs, D.L., And Cleland, D.J., (1996). Production methods and workability of
concrete. pp. 271284.

Bassuoni, M.,T., And Nehdi, M.,L., (2007). Resistance of self consolidating concrete to
sulphuric acid attack with consecutive pH reduction. Cement and concrete research, Vol. 37, pp.
1070-1084.

Bonavetti, V.L., Donza, H., Menendez, G., Cabrera,O., And Irassar, E.F., (2003). Limestone
filler cement in low w/c concrete: a rational use of energy. Vol. 33, pp. 865871.

Bonen, D.A., (1993). Microstructural study of the effect produced by magnesium sulfate on
plain and silica fume-bearing Portland cement mortars. Cement and Concrete research, Vol. 23,
pp. 54153.

Boel, V., Audenaert, K., Schutter , De, G., Heirman, G., Vandewalle, L., And Desmet, B.,
(2005). Gas permeability of self-compacting concrete. In: Proceedings of 2nd NorthAmerican
conference on the design and use of self-consolidating concrete (SCC) and the 4th international
RILEM symposium on self-compactingconcrete.,Chicago; pp. 341346.
Boukendakdji, O., Kadri, E.,H., And Kenai, S., (2011). Effect of granulated blast furnance slag
and superplasticizer on fresh properties and compressive strength of self compacting concrete.
Cement and concrete composites, In press.

Brouwers, H.J.H., And Radix, H.J., (2005). Self-compacting concrete: theoretical and
experimental study. Cement and Concrete research; Vol. 35, pp. 211636.

BS 3892, (1997). Pulverized-fuel ash Part 1: specification for pulverized-fuel ash for use with
Portland cement, British Standards Institution.

BS 1881, (1970). Method for Testing of Hardened Concrete for other than Strength; Part 5.

Bui, V.K., Montgomery, D., Hinczak, I., and Turner, K., (2002). "Rapid testing method for
segregation resistance of self-compacting concrete", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 32, pp.
1489-1496.

Caldarone, M.A., Gruber, K.A., and Burg, R.G., (1994). High-reactivity metakaolin: a new
generation mineral admixture. Concrete International Vol. 16(11), pp 3740.

Dehn, F., Holschemacher, K., And Weisse, D., (2000). Self-Compacting Concrete - Time
Development of the Material Properties and the Bond Behavior, LACER No 5, pp. 115-123.

Dehwah, H., A., F., (2012). Mechanical properties of self compacting concrete incorporating
quarry dust powder, silica fume or fly ash. Construction and building materials, Vol. 26, pp.
547-551.

Dhir, R. K. And Dyer, T. D., (1999). Modern Concrete Materials: Binders, Additions and
Admixtures, Thomas Telford Publishing, London, UK.

Dietz, J. and Ma, J., (2000). Preliminary Examinations for the Production of Self-Compacting
Concrete Using Lignite Fly Ash, LACER No.5, pp.125-130.

EFNARC, (2002). Specifications and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete, EFNARC,

UK , (www.efnarc.org), pp. 1-32.

El-Dieb, A., S., (2009). Mechanical, durability and microstructural characteristics of ultra hight
strength self compacting concrete incorporating steel fibres. Material and design, Vol. 30, pp.
4286-4292.
Felekoglu, B., (2007). Utilisation of high volume limestone quarry wastes in concrete industry
(self compacting concrete case), Resources Conservation & Recycling, Vol. 51, pp. 770-791.

Felekoglu, B., Turkel, S., And Baradan, B., (2007). Effect of water/cement ratio on the fresh
and hardened properties of self-compacting concrete. Building and Environment, Vol. 42, pp.
17951802.

Ferraris, C. F., Brower, L., Daczko, J., And Ozyldirim, C., (1999). Workability of Self-
Compacting Concrete, Journal of Research of NIST, Vol. 104, pp. 461-478.

Ferraris, C. F., (1999). Measurement of the Rheological Properties of High-Performance

Concrete, J. Res. Natl. Inst. Techn., Vol. 104, pp.461-477.

Ganesan N , Indira P.V. & Kumar, S., (2006). Durability aspects of steel fibre-reinforced
SCC, The Indian Concrete Journal, pp 31-37.

Gerwick, B.C. Jr., (1993). Construction of Prestressed Concrete Structures, Second Edition,
John Wiley and Sons Inc., pp. 591.

Gesoglu, M., And Guneyisi, E., (2011). Permeability properties of self-compacting rubberized
concretes. Construction and building materials, Vol. 25, pp 3319-3326.

Gesoglu, M., Guneyisi, E., And Ozbay, E., (2009). Properties of self-compacting concretes
made with binary, ternary, and quaternary cementitious blends of fly ash, blast furnace slag, and
silica fume. Construction and building material, Vol. 23, pp. 1847-1854.

Grdic, Z. J., Gordana, A., Curcic, T., Iva, M., Despotovic, And Ristic, N. S., (2010).
Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with coarse recycled concrete aggregate.
Construction and building material, Vol. 24, pp. 1129-1133.

Guneyisi, E., Gesoglu, M., and Ozbay, E., (2010). Strength and drying shrinkage properties of
self-compacting concretes incorporating multi-system blended mineral admixtures.
Construction and building material, Vol. 24, pp. 1878-1887.

Hassan, A.A., Lachemi, M., and Hossain, M.A., (2012). Effect of metakaolin and silica fume on
the durability of self-consolidating concrete. Cement and concrete composites, Vol. 34, pp. 801-
807.

IS: 3812, (2003). Indian standard on pulverised fuel ash specification. (Part 2). For use as
admixture in cement mortar and concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi (India).
IS 383. (2002). Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources for concrete.
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi (India).

IS: 516 , (1959). Methods of tests for strength of concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi (India).

Kathirvel, P., Kapilarasan, M., Hameed, M.S., And Sekar, A.S.S., (2010). Effect of Sulphate
Attack on Self compacting Concrete. NBM Constructions Information, NBM Media Pvt. Ltd.

Khayat, K.,H., and Aitcin, P.,C., (1987). Silica Fume A unique Supplementary Cementitious
Material, Mineral Admixture in Cement and Concrete, Vol.4.

Khayat, K.H. And Guizani, Z., (1997). Use of Viscosity-Modifying Admixture to Enhance
Stability of Fluid Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 94, pp.332-340.

Khayat, K.H., Assaad, J., And Daczko J., (2004). Comparison of Field-oriented Test Methods
to Assess Dynamic Stability of Self-Consolidated Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 101,
pp. 168-176.

Khayat, K.H., (1999) Workability, Testing and Performance of Self Consolidated Concrete,
ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 96, pp. 346-352.

Khatib, J.M., (2005). Properties of concrete incorporating fine recycled aggregate. Cement and
Concrete research; Vol. 35, pp. 763769.

Khunthongkeaw, J., Tangtermsirikul. S., And Leelawat, T., (2006). A study on carbonation
depth prediction for fly ash concrete. Construction and Building material; Vol. 20, pp. 744
753.

Khaloo, A. R., And Houseinian, M. R., (1999). Evaluation of properties of silica fume for use
in concrete. International Conference on Concretes, Dundee, Scotland.

Kosmatka, S. H., Kerkhoff, B., And Panarese, W. C., (2002). Design and Control of Concrete
Mixtures, 14th Edition, Portland Cement Association.

Kostuch, J., A., Walters, G.,V., and Jones, T.,R. (1993). High performance concrete
incorporating metakaolin: a Review. E & FN Sponsor, pp. 1799-1811.

Kou, S.C., And Poon, C.S., (2009). Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with coarse
and fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement and concrete composites, Vol 31, pp. 622-627.
Krieg, W., (2003). Self-Compacting Concrete: Definition, Development, and Applications, A
Technical Paper Presented in the Meeting of the ACI, Saudi Arabia Chapter, Eastern Province.

Kurita, M., And Nomura, T., (1998). Highly-flowable steel fiber-reinforced concrete containing
fly ash. In: Malhotra VM, editor. Am Concr Inst SP 178, pp. 15975.

Kim, J.K., Han, S.H., Park, Y.D., and Noh, J.H., (1998). "Material Properties of Self-Flowing
Concrete", Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 10, pp. 244-249.

Lachemi, M., Hossain, K.M.A., Lambros, V., Nkinamubanzi, P.C., And Bouzoubaa, N., (2004).
"Performance of new viscosity modifying admixtures in enhancing the rheological properties of
cement paste", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, pp. 185-193.

Lee, S.T., Moon, H.Y., Hootona, R.D., And Kim, J.P., (2005). Effect of solution concentrations
and replacement levels of metakaolin on the resistance of mortars exposed to magnesium sulfate
solutions. Cement and Concrete research; Vol. 35, pp. 13141323

Mata, L. A., (2004). Implementation of Self-Consolidating Concrete (SCC) for

Prestressed Concrete Girders, MS Thesis, North Carolina State University.

Mindess, S., Young, J.F., And Darwin, D., (2003). Concrete. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Nanthagopalan, P., And Santhanam, M., (2011). Fresh and hardened properties of self-
compacting concrete produced with manufactured sand. Cement and concrete composites,
Elsevier Ltd., Vol. 33, pp. 353-358.

Naik, T. R., And Singh, S., (1997). Influence of fly ash on setting and hardening haracteristics
of concrete systems. Materials Journal, Vol. 94, pp.355-360.

Nehdi, M., Pardhan, M., And Koshowski, S., (2004). "Durability of self-consolidating concrete
incorporating high-volume replacement composite cements". Cement and Concrete Research,
Vol. 34, pp. 2103-2112.

Okamura, H. and Ouchi, M., (2003). Self-compacting concrete, Journal of

Advanced Concrete Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 5-15.

Okamura, H., (1997). Self-Compacting High-Performance Concrete, Concrete International,

Vol. 19, pp. 50-54.

Ouchi, M., Hibino, M., Sugamata, T., And Okamura, H., (2001). A quantitative
evaluation method for the effect of superplasticizer in self-compacting concrete, Transactions of
JCI, pp. 15-20.

Ouchi, M., Hibino, M., And Okamura, H., (1996). Effect of Superplasticizer on Self-
Compactability of Fresh Concrete, TRR 1574, pp.37-40.

Ouchi, M., And Hibino, M., (2000). Development, Applications and Investigations of Self-
compacting Concrete.

Persson, B., (2003). Sulphate resistance of self compacting concrete. Cement and concrete
research, Vol. 33, pp. 1933-1938.

Ramachandran, V.,S., (1984). Concrete Admixtures Handbook, Properties, Science, and

Technology. Noyes Publications.

RILEM Committee CPC-18, (1988). Measurement of hardened concrete carbonation depth.

Material and Structures, pp. 18:453455.

Sahmaran,M., Yaman,O.I., And Tokyoy,M., (2009). Transport and mechanical properties of

self consolidating concrete with high volume fly ash. Cement & Concrete Composites; Vol. 31,
pp. 99106.

Siddique, R., Aggarwal, Y., Aggarwal, P., Kadri, E., Bennacer, R., (2011). Strength,
durability, and micro-structural properties of concrete made with used-foundry sand (UFS).
Construction and building material; Vol. 25, pp. 1916-1925.

Siddique, R. (2011). Properties of self-compacting concrete containing class F fly ash.

Materials and Design, Vol. 32, pp. 1501-1507.

Sisomphon, K., Franke, L., (2006). Carbonation rates of concretes containing high volume of
pozzolanic materials. Cement and Concrete research; Vol. 37, pp. 16471653.

Song, H.W. And Kwon, S.J., (2007). Permeability characteristics of carbonated concrete
considering capillary pore structure. Cement and Concrete research, Vol. 23, pp. 909915.

St John, D., A. (1998). Concrete Petrography, A handbook of investigative techniques. Wiley

& Sons, New York.

Taylor H. F.W., (1997). Cement chemistry. 2nd ed. London: Thomas.

Uysal, M., And Sumer, M., (2011) Performance of self-compacting concrete containing
different mineral admixtures. Construction and building material, Vol. 25, pp. 4112-4120.

Xie, Y., Liu, B., Yin, J., And Zhou, S., (2002). Optimum mix parameters of highstrength
selfcompacting concrete with ultrapulverised fly ash. Cement and Concrete research; Vol. 32,
pp. 477480.

Yahia, A,, Tanimura, M., Shimabukuro, A., And Shimoyama, Y., (1999). Effect of
rheological parameters on self compactiblity of concrete containing various mineral admixtures.
In: Proc of the first RILEM international symposium on self compacting concrete, Stockholm.
pp. 523535.

Zhimin W., Yunguo Z., Jianjun Z., And Yining D., (2009). An experimental study on the
workability of self-compacting lightweight concrete. Construction and building material, Vol.
23, pp. 2087-2092.

Zhu, W., Gibbs, C. J., And Bartos, P. J. M., (2001). "Uniformity of in situ properties of self
compacting concrete in full-scale structural elements", Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 23,
pp. 57-64.

Zongin, Li., Bin, Mu., and Stanley, N.,C., (1999). Systematic study of properties of extrudates
with incorporated metakaolin or silica fume. ACI Mater Journal, Vol. 96(5), pp. 574-80.